Topic:"Jurisdictional Questions" in M08888

the NSUARB by letter dated November 28, - 2019. In that letter, EfficiencyOne sought, as a preliminary matter, the opportunity to seek a - determination of the NSUARB's jurisdiction to order the approvals sought by EfficiencyOne in the NEB...

AI summary EfficiencyOne requested the NSUARB to determine its jurisdiction regarding an application. The NSUARB allowed EfficiencyOne to consult stakeholders and frame the jurisdictional question. EfficiencyOne submitted the framing, which the NSUARB accepted and set timelines for submissions.

ailure to apply correctness review would undermine the rule of law and jeopardize the proper functioning of the justice system in a manner analogous to the three situations described in this decision. For example, the Court is not persuade...

AI summary The court emphasizes that abandoning correctness review for administrative decisions risks undermining the rule of law. It rejects creating distinct correctness categories for discordant legal questions or jurisdictional issues, arguing reasonableness review suffices to ensure legal coherence and proper authority scope. Courts should prioritize this decision when determining standards of review, relying on past precedents for guidance.

D. A Note Regarding Jurisdictional Questions [65] We would cease to recognize jurisdictional questions as a distinct category attracting correctness review. The majority in Dunsmuir held that it was "without question" (para. 50) that the c...

AI summary The text discusses the evolution of legal standards for reviewing jurisdictional questions, referencing Dunsmuir and subsequent cases like Guérin and Alberta Teachers , which expressed reservations about maintaining jurisdictional questions as a distinct category requiring correctness review. The focus is on the shifting judicial approach to statutory authority and legal review standards.

- [1] EfficiencyOne applied to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board on September 19, 2018, for approval to use measure-level non-energy benefits for costeffectiveness testing associated with future DSM planning regulatory processes. Th...

AI summary EfficiencyOne applied to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board in 2018 to consider non-energy benefits in DSM planning. The Board raised jurisdictional concerns under the Public Utilities Act. After further consultation, the Board ruled that it lacks jurisdiction to consider non-energy impacts in cost-effectiveness testing.

the Public Utilities Act. - [43] EfficiencyOne stated that the use of the term "cost-effective" in Sections 79H and 791(1) of the Public Utilities Act means that the Legislature intended the cost- effectiveness of such activities to be a m...

AI summary EfficiencyOne argues that the Public Utilities Act's 'cost-effective' language grants the NSUARB jurisdiction over non-energy benefits in DSM programs. The Board counters that non-energy benefits fall outside its core mandate, while NSP cites a Federal Court of Appeal decision limiting the National Energy Board's authority. The Board currently uses the Total Resource Cost Test for DSM evaluations.

________ EfficiencyOne looks forward to NSUARB's consideration of this proposed jurisdictional question and, upon approval, the establishment of timelines for its determination. Respectfully, THE BRETON LAW GROUP James R. Gogan Melissa Mac...

AI summary EfficiencyOne, represented by The Breton Law Group, anticipates the NSUARB's review of a proposed jurisdictional question and the establishment of timelines for its resolution. The letter is addressed to multiple stakeholders, including legal representatives and EfficiencyOne personnel.