T: 416-862-4836 email JulieView full profile.
T: 613-761-2424 email CharlesView full profile.
T: 416-862-4837 email RichardView full profile.
T: 416-646-4894 email GiselleView full profile.
T: 613-217-8521 email John View full profile.
T: 416-862-4825 email MatthewView full profile.
T: 416-862-4826 email JohnView full profile.
T: 416-862-4827 email Raeya View full profile.
T: 416-862-4820 email MarcView full profile.
T: 416-862-4831 email CarlView full profile.
T: 416-642-4874 email AlessiaView full profile.
T: 416-862-4822 email DonnaView full profile.
T: 416-862-4829 email AnandView full profile.
T: 416-862-4828 email JacquelynView full profile.
T: 416-862-4835 email MadihaView full profile.
T: 416-862-4830 email JoannaView full profile.
T: 416-642-4873 email LaurenView full profile.
Environment • Aboriginal • Energy
In Aroland First Nation v Transcanada Pipelines Limited, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice declined to decide on a motion whether the duty to consult applies to routine maintenance activities, specifically integrity digs and hydrostatic testing, for pipelines approved before the courts articulated the duty to consult.
The issue was brought before the Court on a motion for partial summary judgement. The Court held that the issue could not be “fairly and justly decided” on such a motion. Instead, the issue will be dealt with in the main action.
This action raises interesting legal issues with practical significance for proponents and Indigenous communities. The ultimate decision will fill in details about how and when to apply the duty to consult.
Click here to read the full article.