Topic:"Boards Regulatory Rules" in M12972

BACKGROUND On July 12, 2026, you filed a Notice of Appeal with respect to an unresolved billing dispute with Nova Scotia Power Inc. This letter addresses your request of the same date for confidentiality made under s. 12 of the Board Regul...

AI summary A Notice of Appeal was filed on July 12, 2026, regarding an unresolved billing dispute with Nova Scotia Power Inc. The letter also addresses a request for confidentiality under s. 12 of the Board Regulatory Rules.

CONFIDENTIALITY FRAMEWORK The criteria for a confidentiality order is set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Sierra Club of Canada v Canada (Minister of Finance) , 2002 SCC 41 ( Sierra Club ). In Sierra Club the Court held that confiden...

AI summary The confidentiality framework is based on the Supreme Court of Canada's criteria from Sierra Club of Canada v Canada (Minister of Finance) , 2002 SCC 41, which permits confidentiality orders under specific conditions. These conditions are also reflected in s. 12(10) of the Board Regulatory Rules. The open courts principle emphasizes transparency in the Board's processes and the public interest in accessible information.

nts or in the Board's public matter title, would confirm identifying details in a new and durable format, compounding an already-established pattern of physical vulnerability at an isolated residence. Normally, the Boards decisions and hea...

AI summary The Board has denied the request to anonymize parties involved in the proceeding, citing a lack of evidence of serious risk to public interest and emphasizing the importance of transparency in legal proceedings. It reaffirms the principle of open court and the need for public accountability.

CONFIDENTIALITY FRAMEWORK The criteria for a confidentiality order is set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Sierra Club of Canada v Canada (Minister of Finance) , 2002 SCC 41 ( Sierra Club ). In Sierra Club the Court held that confiden...

AI summary The confidentiality framework is guided by the Supreme Court of Canada's criteria from Sierra Club of Canada v Canada (Minister of Finance) , 2002 SCC 41, which permits confidentiality orders under specific conditions. These criteria are also reflected in s. 12(10) of the Board Regulatory Rules, emphasizing the open courts principle and the public interest in transparency within Board proceedings.

CONCLUSION Under Board Regulatory Rule 12, you requested confidential treatment of certain personal identifiers. As noted above, your mailing/civic address, your NS Power account number, your personal email address, your telephone number a...

AI summary The Board denied a request for confidential treatment of a complainant's full name, finding no serious risk to a public interest. The full name will be made public in all filings related to the matter. The complainant may withdraw the complaint within seven days of the decision.

From: Wallace, Lisa Sent: August 17, 2026 8:49 AM To: ; Penney, Nicole Cc: Blake WIlliams ; Carley Freeman ; Chris Lanteigne ; Jennifer Ross ; Lisa Forsey ; Sofia Reiner ; Sonia Liao ; Kathleen Murray Subject: RE: M12972 - NSPI Complaint -...

AI summary The Board responds to questions regarding the disclosure of a complainant's address, citing the open courts principle as the legal authority. It clarifies that no advance notice is required for such disclosure.

\ \ EXTERNAL EMAIL / COURRIEL EXTERNE \ \ Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking on links / Faites preuve de prudence si vous ouvrez une pièce jointe ou cliquez sur un lien Subject: RE: Situation of complaint withdrawal — Fo...

AI summary The complainant disputes the Board's claim that their civic/mailing address can be disclosed under the open court principle, arguing that this contradicts the Board's previous Rule 12 ruling which excluded such information from public disclosure. They request clarification on the legal authority for the disclosure and whether the Board's position has changed.

\ \ EXTERNAL EMAIL / COURRIEL EXTERNE \ \ Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking on links / Faites preuve de prudence si vous ouvrez une pièce jointe ou cliquez sur un lien Subject: RE: Situation of complaint withdrawal — 15...

AI summary The writer is concerned that their previous letter regarding the Board's answer to question 4(b) about the open court principle has not been adequately addressed. They highlight a contradiction between the Board's own ruling on their case and a recent statement that their address is subject to disclosure under the open court principle.