Government compliance with the reporting requirements under the Climate Change Accountability Act, S.B.C. 2007, c. 42 is justiciable

21. March 2023 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Ministry of Environment – Reporting requirements – Judicial review – Legislative compliance – Standard of review – Reasonableness – Environmental matters Sierra Club of British Columbia Foundation v. British Columbia (Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy), [2023] B.C.J. No.80, 2023 BCSC 74, British Columbia Supreme Court, January 17, ...

The Province does not need to prove fire control efforts were necessary or effective to recover such costs under the Wildfire Act

21. March 2023 0
Administrative law – Decisions reviewed – Forest Appeals Commission – Judicial review – Legislative compliance – Costs – Environmental matters – Forest practices Canadian National Railway Co. v. British Columbia, [2022] B.C.J. No. 2510, 2022 BCSC 2263, British Columbia Supreme Court, December 28, 2022, N. Sharma J. On June 11, 2015, a wildfire was sparked ...

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 ...