Impossibility of Compliance Defence – Mount Polley’s attempt at avoiding contravention of its permit

18. October 2022 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Environmental Appeal Board – Penalties – Compliance with legislation – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness – Environmental matters – Assessment – Permits and licences – Inspections – Natural resources – Mining – Water Mount Polley Mining Corp. v. British Columbia (Environmental Appeal Board), [2022] ...

Where there is evidence before the decision-maker to support his decision, the court ought not itself consider the scientific and technical evidence

Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Minister – Approval process – Environmental matters – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness Sorflaten v. Nova Scotia (Minister of Environment), [2018] N.S.J. No. 91, 2018 NSSC 55, Nova Scotia Supreme Court, March 20, 2018, J.L. Chipman J. The applicants sought ...

Application for judicial review of the Governor in Counsel’s decision that the significant adverse environmental effects that the Minister of the Environment determined would likely result were justified in the circumstances

19. November 2015 0
Application for judicial review of the Governor in Counsel’s decision that the significant adverse environmental effects that the Minister of the Environment determined would likely result from the Site C Clean Energy Project on the Peace River were justified in the circumstances. After determining that the reasonableness standard of review applied, and that a considerable ...

Enbridge Pipelines (“Enbridge”) applied to the National Energy (the “Board”) for approval of its pipeline expansion project. The Board granted approval on conditions, but the applicants sought judicial review of three interlocutory decisions made by the Board.

23. December 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – National Energy Board – Natural resources – Oil and gas – Environmental matters – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Freedom of expression – Participatory rights – Judicial review – Application to participate in hearing – Standing – Compliance with legislation Forest Ethics Advocacy Assn. v. Canada ...

The petitioner, Pacific Booker Minerals Inc., owners of property on Morrison Lake, worked for several years to obtain an environmental assessment certificate under the Environmental Assessment Act, S.B.C. 2002, c. 43 (the “Certificate”), to allow it to construct and operate copper/gold and minerals mine next to Morrison Lake, 65 kilometres northeast of Smithers. In August 2012, the Ministers of Environment and of Energy, Mines and Natural Gas (the “Ministers”) received a final assessment report from the Executive Director of the Environmental Assessment Office which concluded that although the project “would not result in any significant adverse effects with the successful implementation of mitigation measures and conditions”, the Executive Director nevertheless recommended Ministers refuse to issue a certificate. Based on the Executive Director’s report, the Ministers refused to issue the Certificate. On judicial review, the Court quashed and set aside the Ministers’ decision, and ordered that the petitioner’s application for a certificate be remitted back to the Ministers for reconsideration, on the basis of procedural fairness grounds. In particular, the petitioner had a reasonable expectation and right to be able to respond to at least the essence of the adverse recommendations and the “additional factors” raised by the Executive Director in his final report. The Court further ordered that the petitioner and the various First Nation group intervenors, be provided with the Executive Director’s recommendations to the Ministers, and an opportunity to provide a response to the recommendations.

25. February 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Environmental Assessment Office – Approval process – Environmental matters – Environmental Assessment Certificate – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Procedural requirements and fairness – Legitimate expectations Pacific Booker Minerals Inc. v. British Columbia (Minister of the Environment), [2013] B.C.J. No. 2694, 2013 BCSC 2258, British ...

The applicant, Mr. Fisher, applied for judicial review of an order of the Minister of the Department of Environment, Labour and Justice ordering the applicant to pay the costs of remediation services on the applicant’s property

25. February 2014 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Environmental matters – Contaminated sites – Remediation – Costs – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Compliance with legislation – Human rights – Charter of Rights and Freedoms Fisher v. Prince Edward Island (Minister of Environment, Labour and Justice), ...

The Court issued an order quashing the appellants’ statutory appeals and applications for review of an Environmental Review Tribunal’s decision. The appellants had been ordered to assume the costs of remediation activities on property formerly owned by two companies which had insufficient funds to cover the cost of remediation. The appellants were all former directors or officers of one or both of the companies.

27. August 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Environmental matters – Contaminated sites – remediation – Judicial review – Appeals – Jurisdiction of court – Stay of proceedings – Remedies – Interlocutory injunctions Baker v. Ontario (Director, Ministry of the Environments), [2013] O.J. No. 3145, 2013 ONSC 4142, Ontario Superior Court of ...

The Court upheld an Environmental Protection Order issued by the Minister of the Environment as valid under the Environmental Management and Protection Act. The Court held that the appellants had been properly notified of the Minister’s intent to issue the order, and that despite the fact that the appellants no longer occupied the property in question, the Order conformed with the “polluter pay” principle established by the Supreme Court of Canada.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Environmental matters – Contaminated sites – Remediation – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation Envirogun Ltd. v. Saskatchewan (Minister of Environment), [2012] S.J. No. 320, 2011 SKQB 339, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, September 16, 2011, J.E. McMurty J. The Appellants, Envirogun Ltd. and ...

A person may bring a legal proceeding to challenge the decision of a public or quasi-public body only if the person’s private rights are directly affected by the decision, or the person is exceptionally prejudiced by the decision in a manner different from the general public. In the alternative, a Court has discretion to grant public interest standing, where a party does not have personal standing. A group opposing the decision of the Director, Ministry of the Environment to issue a Renewable Energy Approval for the construction and operation of a Class 4 wind facility in the Township of Mapletown, did not meet the test for public interest standing as it did not establish that a genuine interest in the issues raised. As well, PMI had an appeal right to the Environmental Review Tribunal, which it had exercised.

26. June 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Ministerial orders – Environmental matters – Judicial review – Parties – Standing – Public interest – Procedural requirements and fairness – Compliance with legislation Preserve Mapleton Inc. v. Ontario (Director, Ministry of the Environment), [2012] O.J. No. 2037, 2012 ONSC 2115, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, April ...