Link to Decision SummarizedJudicial Review - MootIn this decision, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench (“ABQB”) dismissed an application for judicial review from The Edmonton River Valley Conservation Coalition Society (the “Society”), claiming that the Edmonton City...
These articles by our expert team cover the details of various decisions made by the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER), Alberta Utilities Commision (AUC), and Canada Energy Regulator (CER). Browse our searchable archive below to learn more about the results we’ve achieved for our clients.
Tsleil-Waututh Nation v. Canada (Attorney General) (2018 FCA 153)
In this decision, the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) considered consolidated applications for judicial review by Aboriginal groups and two cities (Vancouver and Burnaby) (the “Applicants”), seeking to quash decisions of the NEB and Governor in Council (“GiC”) approving the Trans Mountain Expansion Project (the “Project”), namely:
(a) the NEB decision report dated May 19, 2016 (the “NEB Report”); and
(b) the Order in Council, PC 2016-1069, dated November 29, 2016, made by the GiC (the “Order in Council”).
The Applicants challenged the Order in Council on two principal grounds: (1) the NEB’s process and findings were so flawed that the GiC could not reasonably rely on the NEB Report; and (2) Canada failed to fulfill the duty to consult owed to Indigenous peoples.
The FCA allowed the applications for judicial review of the Order in Council, quashed the Order in Council and remitted the matter to the GiC for redetermination.
Bigstone Cree Nation v. Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. (2018 FCA 89)
In this decision, the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) considered an application by Bigstone Cree Nation (“Bigstone”) for judicial review of Order in Council P.C. No. 2016-962 (the “Order”) made by the Governor in Council (the “GIC”) dated October 28, 2016. The Order directed the NEB to issue an environmental assessment decision statement concerning the 2017 Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. (“NGTL”) System Expansion Project in northern Alberta (the “Project”), and to issue the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity GC-126 (the “CPCN”) authorizing the construction and operation of the Project.
For the reasons summarized below, the FCA dismissed Bigstone’s application, finding that the Crown had adequately fulfilled its duty to consult and accommodate Bigstone.
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation v. Alberta (2018 ABQB 262)
In this decision, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench (“ABQB”) considered an application for judicial review of a decision of the Aboriginal Consultation Office (“ACO”), dated July 17, 2014 (the “ACO Decision”). The ACO Decision found that a duty to consult with the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (“ACFN”) was not triggered in relation to a pipeline project. The pipeline project, entitled Grand Rapids, (the “Project”), was proposed in Treaty 8 territory, and the ACFN is a Treaty 8 First Nation. The Project was proposed by TransCanada Pipelines Limited and Phoenix Energy Holdings Limited (“TransCanada”).
Tsleil-Waututh Nation v Canada (Attorney General) (2017 FCA 128)
The FCA granted Canada’s motion but denied the Tsleil-Waututh Nation’s motion, for the reasons summarized below.
Kainaiwa/Blood Tribe v. Alberta (2017 ABQB 107)
The ABQB quashed the decision and returned the Band’s request to the Minister for reconsideration.
Fort McMurray Metis, Local 1935 v. Alberta (Minister of Aboriginal Relations), 2016 ABQB 712
In Fort McMurray Metis, Local 1935 v. Alberta (Minister of Aboriginal Relations), 2016 ABQB 712 (a companion decision to 2016 ABQB 713, summarized above), Justice Goss issued her reasons for granting judicial review of an ACO decision regarding whether the Crown’s duty to consult had been triggered.
Fort Chipewyan Métis Nation of Alberta, Local 125 v. Alberta (Minister of Aboriginal Relations), 2016 ABQB 713
Fort Chipewyan Métis Nation of Alberta, Local 125 (“Local 125”) sought to assert on behalf of the Fort Chipewyan Metis Community (the “FCM Community”) an aboriginal right of consultation regarding the proposed Teck Frontier Oil Sands Mine (the “Project”).