E-10-(i)Book of Authorities
125 passages
LEGISLATION - 6. Interpretation Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 235 - 7. Public Utilities Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 380 - 8. Utility and Review Board Act, S.N.S. 1992, c. 11
AI summary The document references three Nova Scotia legislative acts: the Interpretation Act, Public Utilities Act, and Utility and Review Board Act. These laws provide the legal framework for utility regulation, interpretation of statutes, and the operational authority of the Utility and Review Board in the province.
IN THE MATTER OF THE EFFICIENCY NOVA SCOTIA CORPORATION ACT - and- IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION by EFFICIENCY NOVA SCOTIA CORPORATION for Approval of its Electricity Demand Side Management Plan for 2012 BEFORE: Peter W. Gurnham, a.c., C...
AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation sought approval for its 2012 Electricity Demand Side Management Plan. The NSUARB heard applications from multiple stakeholders, including Nova Scotia Power Inc., municipalities, and environmental groups. The board approved the application and directed future filings. Key participants included legal counsel, consultants, and regulatory bodies.
emand-side management programs with a view to restraining electricity demand and use; and - (b) may engage in energy efficiency and conservation programs other than electricity demand-side management. - 31 (1) Subject to the approval of th...
AI summary The ENSC Act outlines Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation's (ENSC) authority to manage demand-side programs and energy efficiency initiatives. It mandates the Nova Scotia Utility & Review Board (NSUARB) to approve annual assessments, oversee cost allocation between programs, and supervise ENSC's compliance. Key provisions include program submission requirements, just-and-reasonable cost allocation, and the NSUARB's supervisory role.
5.3.1 Findings [101] The Board has considered the three pilot projects proposed by ENSC. There appears to be general support for these projects with which the Board agrees. [102] The Board expects ENSC to implement these projects in 2011 a...
AI summary The NSUARB supports ENSC's three pilot projects, expecting their 2011 implementation and future progress reports. The Board aligns with general stakeholder support for these initiatives.
5.5.1 Findings [125] The Board understands that ENSC's mandate is being expanded to manage non-electricity efficiency programs. Some transition is already underway and formal negotiations are to be concluded in the near future. ENSC, at th...
AI summary ENSC is expanding its mandate to manage non-electricity efficiency programs but lacks a formal policy to track time and costs. The Board shares intervenors' concerns about delays and potential cross-subsidization, ordering ENSC to submit its policy by September 30, 2011.
[128] The Dunsky report noted that: The move to a performance-based model would provide ENSC with increased flexibility to adjust and adapt its plans as needed, as situations arise and as feedback comes in. Furthermore, an oversight model...
AI summary The Dunsky report supports ENSC's shift to a performance-based model (PBM) for DSM programs, citing flexibility and reduced regulatory burden. The Province and EAC endorse PBM discussions, while Board Counsel questions the need for Board approval for stakeholder consultation. ENSC seeks Board approval to explore PBM implementation, emphasizing cost recovery and program flexibility.
5.6.1 Findings [134] ENSC suggests exploration of a PBM with stakeholders for future approval by the Board. The Board noted its concerns during the hearing and ENSC elaborated on the issue in its closing submission. [135] Based on this, th...
AI summary ENSC proposes exploring a PBM with stakeholders for future Board approval. The Board initially expressed concerns but, after ENSC's closing submission, has no objection to stakeholder discussions on PBM.
IN THE MATTER OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT - and - IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION for Approval of a Supply Agreement for electricity efficiency and conservation activities between EfficiencyOne and Nova Scotia Power Incorporated, the estab...
AI summary The document outlines an application by EfficiencyOne and Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) for approval of a supply agreement for electricity efficiency and conservation activities, and the establishment of a 2016-2018 Demand Side Management (DSM) Resource Plan, before the Nova Scotia Utility & Review Board (NSUARB).
- [15] The Board is to determine the activities to be undertaken, and NSPI is to undertake the activities by virtue of an agreement for a three year term with the franchise holder, approved by the Board ( PUA ss. 79(H), 79(I), and 79(J))....
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility & Review Board (Board) directs Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NSPI) to undertake demand-side management (DSM) activities under a three-year agreement with E1 (formerly the first franchise holder). Spending limits are set by the Public Utilities Act (PUA) and the Electricity Efficiency and Conservation Restructuring (2014) Act (EECR Act), with recovery deferred over eight years. The Board's approval of funding and charges is governed by PUA sections 79R and 79Q.
Q. Are you satisfied with the status of the 2013 verification and evaluation recommendations? A. Yes. In general, from year to year Econoler has been responsive to all recommendations in the Savings Verification study, either making small...
AI summary The respondent confirms satisfaction with the 2013 verification recommendations, noting Econoler and E1's responsiveness. The Board accepts this but directs E1 to update on 2014 recommendations and removes Home Energy Report savings from 2014 totals due to concerns. The Home Energy Report is excluded from the 2016-2018 DSM portfolio.
3.5.3 Affordability [76] Having determined the parameters of a preferred plan, the Board is specifically directed by the 2014 amendments to the PUA to address the issue of affordability. The most relevant sections are Section 79L(8) and (9...
AI summary The NSUARB must address affordability under the 2014 PUA amendments, specifically Sections 79L(8) and (9), which require evaluating electricity efficiency programs' affordability for NSPI customers. Traditionally, the Board used the lowest long-term cost principle, but affordability is now a critical factor. The Board must assess whether the amendments alter DSM expenditure evaluations and if the proposed plan meets affordability criteria.
3.5.6 Avoided Cost Analysis [101] Synapse, in its evidence, indicated that rate impact analysis should account for all factors that impact rates either positively or negatively, which would include avoided costs that might exert downward p...
AI summary Synapse argues rate impact analysis must include avoided costs, such as environmental compliance. E1 and NSPI discuss locational DSM's potential to reduce transmission costs. The Board supports collaboration on locational avoided cost considerations.
3.6 Performance Targets, Indicators, and Thresholds [108] E1 proposed that the performance targets be cumulative annual energy and peak demand savings at the end of the three year period at the portfolio level and the performance indicator...
AI summary E1 proposed cumulative energy and peak demand savings targets over three years, with annual reporting of incremental and lifetime savings. A 90% threshold was set, with targets confirmed in the Quantum Agreement. The Board's reduction of DSM expenditures may impact these targets.
3.6.1 Findings [111] The Consensus Agreement signed by the parties, and approved by the Board, provides further details on the performance targets, indicators and thresholds. These targets are cumulative at the end of the three year period...
AI summary The Consensus Agreement, approved by the Board, sets performance targets with a 90% compliance threshold over three years. E1 is ordered to include these targets in its Compliance Filing, as outlined in the Decision.
3.7 Mid-Course Adjustments and Flexibility [112] In the Consensus Agreement, the parties agreed to the setting of targets over a three year period, instead of annual targets. E1 had sought the ability to make changes of up to 25% in target...
AI summary The Consensus Agreement allows E1 to adjust program targets by up to 25% annually at the sector level, with explanations required for changes exceeding this threshold. E1 agreed to avoid substantial annual impacts on customer classes and provide written notice for mid-course adjustments. The Industrial Group opposed this flexibility, arguing against allowing adjustments that could affect customer classes by more than 25%.
3.10.1 Findings [121] The Board has reviewed the Supply Agreement and has no comments at this time. E1 is ordered to complete the Supply Agreement incorporating the Board's Decision as a part of its Compliance Filing.
AI summary The Board reviewed the Supply Agreement and found no issues, but ordered E1 to finalize the agreement incorporating the Board's Decision into its Compliance Filing. This ensures alignment with regulatory requirements.
3.12.1 Findings [126] The parties in the Consensus Agreement have agreed to work on a standardized filing template and other information and to submit a report to the Board for approval. [127] The Board approves this process and awaits the...
AI summary The Consensus Agreement parties agree to develop a standardized filing template and submit a report to the Board for approval, which the Board has approved and is awaiting the report.
aving considered the history of underspending on DSM programming, the history of overachieving savings and demand targets, and as an inducement to bring greater rigor to the calculation of incentives. [142] The Board considers that the tar...
AI summary The Board approves the E1 DSM Plan, noting its alignment with the PUA's best interests for NSPI customers. It emphasizes balancing short-term affordability with long-term costs, approves aspects of the Consensus Agreement, and retains TRC for cost-effectiveness screening while rejecting the Quantum Agreement.
1) IMPORTATION OF AGREEMENT a) The parties agree to incorporate by reference all of the terms of agreement reached in the partial settlement agreement among EfficiencyOne, Nova Scotia Power, the Consumer Advocate, the Small Business Advoca...
AI summary Parties agree to incorporate terms from a partial settlement agreement in Matter M06733, involving EfficiencyOne, Nova Scotia Power, the Consumer Advocate, and other stakeholders before the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board.
5) EVALUATION AND REPORTING - a) The Parties support EfficiencyOne's proposal for annual program impact evaluations and process evaluations at the organizational level with program process evaluations if required. EfficiencyOne will provid...
AI summary Parties support EfficiencyOne's proposal for annual program evaluations, including impact and process assessments. EfficiencyOne will report on 2016-2018 performance, explain substantial changes (≥25% variance), and provide advance notice for mid-course adjustments. Reporting timelines and content are subject to Board revisions via Schedule 1.
Information for franchise holder - 79K (1) Nova Scotia Power Incorporated shall provide a franchise holder with such information in its possession or control, including records and personal information, respecting customer electricity usag...
AI summary Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) must provide franchise holders with customer electricity usage data for energy efficiency initiatives. Franchise holders may apply to the Board if NSPI fails to comply. Confidentiality clauses apply, except for publicly available or legally mandated disclosures. References to PUA and PIPEDA define 'personal information' and compliance obligations.
Disclosure without knowledge or consent - 7(3) For the purpose of clause 4.3 of Schedule 1, and despite the note that accompanies that clause, an organization may disclose personal information without the knowledge or consent of the indivi...
AI summary The text outlines conditions for disclosing personal information without consent under section 7(3)(c), including compliance with court orders or laws. The Board considered submissions on PIPEDA's impact on interpreting PUA's s. 79K(1) and CASL's implications for E1's marketing practices using Names and Emails.
V NAMES AND EMAILS [24] The request for Names and Emails was the most contentious issue raised by the parties. While there is some overlap in relation to the evidence and statutory interpretation principles in relation to the Customer Usag...
AI summary The Names and Emails request was the most contentious issue, with the Board prioritizing its resolution despite overlap with Customer Usage Data evidence and statutory interpretation challenges.
well as in a manner consistent with its Affiliate Code of Conduct. - [33] It further indicates the transfer of the Names and Emails is consistent with NSPI's own privacy policy, which states, in part: We do not sell or rent our customers'...
AI summary NSPI and E1 discuss data privacy practices, opt-out mechanisms for DSM promotions under the PUA, and historical data sharing with OPower. E1 argues opt-out aligns with PUA and convenience, while NSPI highlights concerns over customer data release and references prior OPower collaboration.
i) Statutory Interpretation - [42] Based on the legislative history of the enactment of s. 79K of the PUA , the purpose of the legislation, and the language used in this provision, E1 submits that the legislation is "broadly worded and sho...
AI summary E1 argues that s. 79K of the PUA should be interpreted expansively, allowing disclosure of personal information from NSPI under the 2016-2018 Supply Agreement, which was approved by the Board. The legislative intent and language support this broad interpretation.
Information to be provided by public utilities and confidentiality - 21 (1) Upon written notice from the Corporation, a public utility shall, within such reasonable time as is specified in the notice, provide to the Corporation, for the pu...
AI summary The text outlines legal requirements for public utilities to disclose customer electricity data to the Corporation, with confidentiality exceptions. It references 2014 legislative amendments under the PUA and EECRA, which transferred DSM functions from Efficiency Nova Scotia Corporation to E1 (EfficiencyOne) as the initial franchise holder.
Information and assistance for new franchise holder - 79E (1) In the event of the termination or expiration of a franchise, the franchise holder shall provide a new franchise holder with the information in its possession or control, includ...
AI summary This section outlines obligations for franchise holders to transfer information and assistance to new holders or Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSP) upon franchise termination, ensuring uninterrupted electricity efficiency activities. Confidentiality rules apply, with exceptions for publicly available information. The Minister directs the transfer process, and NSP acts as a fallback recipient if no new franchise holder exists.
ii) Are the Names and Emails information respecting customer electricity and load? [70] Mindful of the more general principles of statutory interpretation discussed above, the Board will now address the specific interpretation issues relat...
AI summary The Board determines that Names and Emails are 'information respecting electricity usage and load' under the PUA, as they are necessary for E1 to deliver cost-effective DSM services. NSPI and SBA argue the data is unrelated to usage/load, but the Board emphasizes contextual interpretation tied to DSM's goal of altering end-user consumption patterns.
establishes that targeted emails and mailouts to a named recipient result in higher participation rates. The Board has sufficient evidence to support this proposition, and no evidence to the contrary. - [88] The Board accepts the evidence...
AI summary The Board finds that collecting Names and Emails is necessary for E1 to achieve cost-effective energy efficiency programs. Evidence shows email marketing outperforms other methods in cost and participation rates. Legislation like PUA and PIPEDA supports data use for DSM goals, balancing privacy with program effectiveness.
Meaning of commercial electronic message - (2) For the purposes of this Act, a commercial electronic message is an electronic message that, having regard to the content of the message, the hyperlinks in the message to content on a website...
AI summary The document defines a commercial electronic message (CEM) under legislation, emphasizing its purpose to encourage commercial activities. E1's DSM service marketing via email is deemed CEMs under CASL, requiring recipient consent. CASL violations carry penalties and potential private rights of action for affected parties.
b) Analysis and Findings - [116] E1 submits the Customer Usage Data falls squarely within the ambit of s. 79K(1) of the PUA , in that it will provide it with customer electricity usage and load information for specific locations, on an ong...
AI summary E1 argues Customer Usage Data falls under PUA s. 79K(1) for DSM activities. NSPI agrees some data may fall under this section. The CA supports E1 but questions data necessity. SBA opposes releasing phone numbers due to privacy. The Board concludes most data is acceptable except phone numbers, which raise PIPEDA concerns.
aissance a une reclamation prouva- ´ ble en mati ere de faillite en vue d'obtenir une indemnite´ de licenciement et une indemnite de cessation d ´ 'emploi conformement aux dispositions de la ´ LNE . At the heart of this conflict is an issu...
AI summary The case centers on interpreting the Employment Standards Act (ESA) and Loi sur les normes d'emploi (LNE) regarding termination and severance pay. The court emphasizes that statutory language must be interpreted contextually, considering the Act's purpose and Parliament's intent, rather than relying solely on literal wording.
Statutes and Regulations Cited Lois et r eglements cites´ ruptcy and Insolvency Act ], s. 121(1). art. 13(2). s. 13(2). art. 40(7). [rep. & sub. 1986, c. 51, s. 2], 40(1) [rep. & sub. 1981, ch. 22, art. 2. s. 5(1)]. L.R.O. 1990, ch. I-11],...
AI summary The document lists statutes, regulations, and legal references cited in a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding, including the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, Employment Standards Act amendments, and case law from Canadian courts. It includes legislative texts, legal commentaries, and judicial decisions relevant to statutory interpretation and employment standards.
Authors Cited Doctrine citee´ - Employment Law in Canada , 2nd ed. Toronto: But- Employment Law in Canada , 2nd ed. Toronto: Butter- - 1991. Driedger, Elmer A. Construction of Statutes , 2nd ed. - Toronto: Butterworths, 1983. Ontario. Legi...
AI summary This case involves employees of a bankrupt employer appealing the disallowance of their termination and severance pay. The appeal hinges on statutory interpretation, determining whether employees are entitled to claims under the relevant legislation during bankruptcy. The court ruled in favor of employees, allowing their claims.
n emploi en raison de la faillite he stated, would defeat the intended working of elle-meme n ˆ 'y aurait pas droit. Ce resultat, a-t-il ´ the ESA. dit, irait a l'encontre du but vise par la loi. ´ employees in the present case would not g...
AI summary The text discusses a legal interpretation of employment standards and bankruptcy law, focusing on whether termination and severance pay under the ESA are considered claims in bankruptcy. Farley J. ruled that such payments are liabilities incurred prior to bankruptcy, creating a contingent obligation under s. 7(5) of the ESA , even if employment relationships are not terminated by bankruptcy itself.
ie des employes. Selon lui, la cessa- ´ termination of employment resulting from an act tion d'emploi resultant de l ´ 'effet de la loi, notamof law such as bankruptcy. ment de la faillite, n'entraˆıne pas l'application de la LNE . reviewe...
AI summary The text discusses whether employment termination due to bankruptcy triggers the Employment Standards Act (ESA). It cites cases like Re Malone Lynch Securities Ltd. and Re Kemp Products Ltd. , arguing that bankruptcy does not constitute dismissal under the Labour Standards Act (LNE). The analysis focuses on legal interpretations of employment termination and bankruptcy.
this appeal turns is whether, when bankruptcy sequent, la question dans le pr ´ esent pourvoi est de ´ occurs, the employment can be said to be termi- savoir si l'on peut dire que l'employeur qui fait
AI summary This appeal examines whether employment can be considered terminated during bankruptcy proceedings, focusing on employer obligations under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. Key issues involve interpreting termination rights and regulatory compliance in Nova Scotia.
Jurisdiction - 22(1) The Board has exclusive jurisdiction in all cases and in respect of all matters in which jurisdiction is conferred on it. - (2) The Board, as to all matters within its jurisdiction pursuant to this Act, may hear and de...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility & Review Board (NSUARB) holds exclusive jurisdiction over all matters under the UARB Act. It has authority to adjudicate both legal and factual questions within its jurisdiction as defined by the Act.
Appeal 30(1) An appeal lies to the Appeal Division of the Supreme Court from an order of the Board upon any question as to its jurisdiction or upon any question of law , upon filing with the Court a notice of appeal within thirty days afte...
AI summary The appeal discusses the limited grounds for appealing a Nova Scotia Utility & Review Board (UARB) order, confined to jurisdiction or law. The court emphasizes that factual findings are generally not appealable unless unsupported by evidence, citing precedents like Dr. Q v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia and Fadelle v. Nova Scotia College of Pharmacists . Legal standards of review, such as reasonableness, are central to the analysis.
or statutes closely connected to its function, with which it will have particular familiarity" should be presumed to be a question of statutory interpretation subject to deference on judicial review.
AI summary The text discusses the standard of review in regulatory proceedings, emphasizing that questions of statutory interpretation are subject to judicial deference. It highlights the importance of familiarity with statutes connected to the Board's function.
- [65] The courts of other provinces similarly have held that a tribunal's interpretation of an expropriation statute is reviewed for reasonableness: e.g. D.D.S. Investments Ltd. v. Toronto (City) (2010), 261 O.A.C. 12 (Div. Ct.), para. 36...
AI summary The text discusses the legal review of a tribunal's interpretation of the Expropriation Act, emphasizing the reasonableness standard. It references precedents from other provinces and highlights the analysis of statutory provisions (ss. 2(1), 26(b), 27(2)-(3), 53(4)) and the application of the Act's policy objectives. The court's role is to assess whether the tribunal's reasoning aligns with legislative intent without substituting its own outcome.
oard deduced that s. 27(3) contemplated something wider than "actual" occupation. - [83] Absent a statutory definition of "occupation", the Board (para. 667) sought guidance from the common law. The Board cited Morrison v. Muise , 2010 NSS...
AI summary The Board interpreted s. 27(3) to encompass broader 'occupation' beyond literal possession, citing Morrison v. Muise and referencing Professor Anne La Forest's analysis of possession in real property law. The Board emphasized evaluating factual circumstances specific to each land dispute.
- 7 The discretion of the Court with respect to costs is not disturbed by the provisions of the statute referred to, although the principle above stated must be kept foremost in mind. In a case such as this one the Court should give effect...
AI summary The Court allocates costs in a regulatory proceeding, awarding Central 80% of its reasonable costs for the Province's exhaustive appeal, while Central bears its own costs for the dismissed cross-appeal. The decision references statutory principles, prior cases ( A.M. Souter , Johnson ), and the Board's role in cost calculation.
duced in Nova Scotia by the Expropriation Act , 1973 (S.N.S. 1973, c. 7). This Act set out the guiding principles to determine compensation. They remain unchanged. - [254] With respect to process, the 1973 Act introduced a new structure to...
AI summary The 1973 Expropriation Act established the Expropriations Compensation Board to determine compensation, with the Nova Scotia Supreme Court's Trial Division having broad appeal rights. The Act did not include a privative clause, allowing judicial review of the Board's decisions.
- [275] After considering the contextual factors, the Alberta Court of Appeal unanimously concluded that correctness was the standard of review. On further appeal, the Supreme Court reversed by a five-four plurality. - [276] I need not ana...
AI summary The Alberta Court of Appeal initially held that correctness was the standard of review, but the Supreme Court of Canada reversed this, applying reasonableness. The majority opinion cited recent jurisprudence supporting reasonableness as the standard for statutory appeals involving administrative tribunals.
- [305] With respect, the Board's decision does not fall within a range of possible acceptable outcomes that are permitted by the legislation. - [306] The Board awarded Central $8.1 million plus interest on some parts of that award. The di...
AI summary The Board's decision on disturbance damages is challenged, arguing it misapplies the Expropriation Act by awarding Central $6.7 million based on claimed loss of opportunity rather than actual losses. The case references the Ontario Expropriation Act and the Toronto Area Transit Operating Authority v. Dell Holdings Ltd. case, where disturbance damages for pre-expropriation delays were not compensable.
r the deposit of the expropriation document in the registry of deeds; - (c) any increase or decrease in the value of the land resulting from the anticipation of expropriation by the expropriating authority or from any knowledge or expectat...
AI summary The text discusses statutory requirements for expropriation compensation, emphasizing the need to claim compensation as of the expropriation date. Provincial employees acted promptly to acquire adjacent properties to manage costs, while Mr. Smith acknowledged potential compensation opportunities, including a 2002 mobile park development involving Mr. Arsenault.
lleague has appropriately referred to the guidance set out by the Supreme Court in McLean v. British Columbia (Securities Commission), [2013] 3 S.C.R. 895, where Moldaver J., for the majority wrote: [38] It will not always be the case that...
AI summary The text references the Supreme Court of Canada's guidance on statutory interpretation, emphasizing that when statutory tools lead to a single reasonable interpretation, administrative decisions adopting a different interpretation are unreasonable. This is supported by cases like McLean v. British Columbia (Securities Commission) and Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Khosa .
Interpretation Act CHAPTER 235 OF THE REVISED STATUTES, 1989 as amended by 1990, c. 31; 1995-96, c. 21; 1995-96, c. 13, s. 81; 2002, c. 10, s. 4; 2003, c.7, s. 2; 2005, c. 34; 2013, c. 35, s. 3 © 2016 Her Majesty the Queen in right of the...
AI summary The Interpretation Act (Chapter 235 of the Revised Statutes, 1989) outlines legislative amendments and definitions, with updates from 1990 to 2013. It is published by the Nova Scotia government and involves the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board.
CHAPTER 235 OF THE REVISED STATUTES, 1989 amended 1990, c. 31; 1995-96, c. 21; 1995-96, c. 13, s. 81; 2002, c. 10, s. 4; 2003, c.7, s. 2; 2005, c. 34; 2013, c. 35, s. 3
AI summary This document outlines Chapter 235 of the Revised Statutes, 1989, with amendments from 1990 to 2013. It reflects legislative updates to Nova Scotia's regulatory framework, though no specific proceedings or arguments are detailed in the provided text.
Application of this Act and judicial rule of construction - 6 (1) Except where a contrary intention appears, every provision of this Act applies to this Act and to every enactment made at the time, before or after this Act comes into force...
AI summary The Act applies broadly unless a contrary intention is evident, with judicial rules of construction retained if applicable and not conflicting. The provision references R.S., c. 235, s. 6, indicating statutory continuity and interpretive framework.
- (q) "Lieutenant Governor in Council", "Governor in Council" or "Government" means the Lieutenant Governor acting by and with the advice of the Executive Council of the Province; - (r) "oath" or "affidavit", in the case of persons for the...
AI summary Definitions of legal terms from a legislative text, including 'person,' 'oath,' and 'Revised Statutes,' with references to the Personal Property Security Act and other statutory frameworks.
Header or appended citation 12 Marginal notes or headers and appended citations of former enactments form no part of the enactment but shall be deemed to have been inserted for convenience of reference only. R.S., c. 235, s. 12.
AI summary The text states that marginal notes and headers in former enactments are not part of the legal enactment but serve as convenience references. It cites R.S., c. 235, s. 12.
Meaning of expression in regulation or order 13 Except when a contrary intention appears, where an enactment confers power to make regulations or to grant, make or issue an order, writ, warrant, scheme or letters patent, expressions used t...
AI summary Section 13 of R.S., c. 235 establishes that expressions in regulations or orders retain the meanings from the original enactment conferring power, unless a contrary intention is evident. This provision governs interpretive consistency in regulatory and order language.
Implied provisions in enactment - 19 In an enactment, - (a) where anything is directed to be done by or before a public officer, it shall be done by or before one whose jurisdiction or power extends to the place where such thing is to be d...
AI summary The text outlines implied provisions in legislation, including jurisdictional requirements, power delegation, majority rule, and statutory interpretation principles. It addresses enforcement mechanisms, definitions, and procedural rules for enactments in Nova Scotia, citing specific statutory references.
Reference in enactment - 21 (1) A reference in an enactment by number or letter to two or more Parts, divisions, Sections, subsections, paragraphs, subparagraphs, clauses, subclauses, schedules or forms in an enactment includes the number...
AI summary This section outlines rules for interpreting references in legal enactments, specifying that references to sections, subsections, or other divisions include the first and last mentioned numbers or letters. It clarifies that references to parts or sections of an enactment typically refer to the same enactment unless otherwise indicated. The provision is cited from the Revised Statutes of Nova Scotia, chapter 235, section 21, with a 1998 revision.
Effect of repeal or repeal and substitution 23 (1) Where an enactment is repealed, the repeal does not - (a) revive any enactment or provision of law that was repealed by the enactment or prevent the effect of any saving clause contained i...
AI summary The section outlines that repealing an enactment does not revive previous laws or affect existing rights, obligations, or legal proceedings. Substituted provisions continue to apply, ensuring continuity in operations and enforcement. This is part of the Revised Statutes of Nova Scotia, 1989, c. 235, section 23.
Disposition of penalty 29 Any penalty or sum of money, or the proceeds of any forfeiture which is by any enactment given to the Province, shall, if no other provision is made respecting it, be paid into the Consolidated Fund, and be accoun...
AI summary The text outlines that penalties or forfeiture proceeds not otherwise allocated must be paid into the Consolidated Fund, as per R.S., c. 235, s. 29. This provision governs the default disposition of such funds in Nova Scotia.
Liability to punishment for same offence 34 Where an act or omission constitutes an offence under two or more enactments, or an offence both under an enactment and at common law, the offender, unless the contrary intention appears, is liab...
AI summary The provision outlines that if an act or omission violates multiple enactments or common law, the offender may be prosecuted under any applicable law but cannot face double punishment for the same offence. This is governed by R.S., c. 235, s. 34, which prevents multiple penalties for a single offence.
Public Utilities Act
AI summary The document pertains to the Public Utilities Act, a legislative framework governing utility regulation in Nova Scotia. Key entities include Nova Scotia Power Inc. and the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board, though specific arguments or cross-references are not detailed in the provided text.
An Act to Regulate Public Utilities title amended 1992, c. 11, s. 43.
AI summary This legislative text outlines 'An Act to Regulate Public Utilities,' amended in 1992 by chapter 11, section 43. It establishes a framework for regulating public utilities in Nova Scotia, ensuring oversight and compliance with utility-related regulations.
(The table of contents is not part of the statute) Section Domestic rate or charge in certain cases 73 Approval for issue of certain securities 74 75 Location of office and books 76 Use of equipment by another utility 77 Consent for erecti...
AI summary The text outlines various sections and regulations related to public utilities, including domestic rate regulations, franchise agreements, board supervision, and procedures for complaints and hearings. It includes sections on electricity efficiency, demand-side management, and the process for handling disputes and regulatory actions.
POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD
AI summary The section outlines the powers and duties of the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB), including oversight of utility companies, regulation of rates, and enforcement of compliance with relevant legislation such as the Utility and Review Board Act and the Public Utilities Act.
Annual report 22 The Board may publish annual reports showing its proceedings and showing in tabular form the details as provided by this Act for all the public utilities of each kind in the Province. R.S., c. 380, s. 22.
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB) is authorized to publish annual reports detailing its proceedings and utility data in tabular form, as mandated by R.S., c. 380, s. 22. This provision outlines the Board's responsibility to provide transparency regarding public utilities in the province.
May be included in annual report 23 The Board may also publish in its annual report the value of all the property actually used and useful for the convenience of the public, and the value of the physical property actually used and useful f...
AI summary The Board may include in its annual report the value of public utility property used for public convenience, particularly for utilities with public hearings or property valuations determined under the Act. This is based on R.S., c. 380, s. 23.
Powers imposed by contract or other Act preserved 24 Subject to this Act, the powers, rights, privileges and obligations secured to or imposed upon any public utility by any statute, or by any contract or agreement made under the authority...
AI summary The Act preserves the rights, powers, and obligations of public utilities under existing statutes or contracts, except for rate-related agreements. The Board may investigate these matters for public interest and recommend changes to the legislature.
Regulations respecting poles and pole lines 26 (1) The Board may make rules and regulations for the erection, construction, maintenance and repair of all poles and pole lines, specifying the type, character, quality and dimensions of such...
AI summary The Board has authority to create regulations for poles and pole lines, specifying their construction and maintenance standards. These regulations override existing provisions in public utility acts, city charters, and the Towns Act, ensuring compliance with public interest requirements.
Duty of utility to furnish information - 33 (1) Every public utility shall furnish to the Board from time to time, and as the Board may require, maps, profiles, contracts, reports of engineers and other documents, records and papers, or co...
AI summary The duty of public utilities in Nova Scotia to provide information to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB) is outlined, including requirements to furnish documents, cooperate in property valuations, and report changes to infrastructure. The Board retains authority to revise valuations based on updates from utilities.
Approval of improvement over $250,000 35 No public utility shall proceed with any new construction, improvements or betterments in or extensions or additions to its property used or useful in furnishing, rendering or supplying any service...
AI summary Public utilities in Nova Scotia must obtain approval from the Board for improvements exceeding $250,000, as mandated by specific sections of the Revised Statutes of Nova Scotia.
Exemption for large-scale public utility - 35AA (1) In this Section, "large-scale public utility" means a public utility with an annual revenue of one hundred million dollars or more. - (2) A large-scale public utility is not required to s...
AI summary This section defines a 'large-scale public utility' as one with annual revenue of $100M or more and exempts such utilities from Board approval for projects under $1M. The exemption is codified in 2019, c. 38, s. 1, part of Nova Scotia's legislative framework.
Board Case Number M06083 - 35E (1) The order of the Board dated September 22, 2014, in proceedings bearing Board Case Number M06083 is deemed to be an approval pursuant to Section 35 for the construction of the property and assets owned by...
AI summary The Board's September 22, 2014 order for the Sable Wind Project is deemed approval under Section 35, except where conflicting with Section 35D. Nova Scotia Power Incorporated cannot seek Board approval for original construction costs or overspending authorizations under its Capital Expenditure Justification Criteria.
Exemption and approval for N.S. Power Inc. - 36 (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any enactment, this Act does not apply to new construction, improvements or betterments in, extensions or additions to, or conversions of...
AI summary Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NSPI) is exempt from certain regulations regarding new construction and improvements to its generation and transmission facilities near Point Aconi, Cape Breton. The Utility and Review Board (URAB) must include specific capital and operating costs in rate determinations for these projects, provided approvals were obtained by April 16, 1992.
Annual depreciation - 38 (1) Every public utility shall make provision for proper and adequate annual depreciation of its property and assets used and useful in furnishing, rendering or supplying each type or kind of service, and shall in...
AI summary The Public Utilities Act mandates that public utilities in Nova Scotia account for annual depreciation using the straight-line method or as prescribed by the Board. Utilities must report depreciation rates to the Board, which can determine or revise these rates as necessary.
Regulations respecting depreciation 40 The Board may also prescribe rules, regulations and forms of accounts regarding depreciation which a public utility is required to observe, carry into effect and follow. R.S., c. 380, s. 40.
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB) is authorized to establish rules, regulations, and account forms related to depreciation for public utilities, ensuring compliance with R.S., c. 380, s. 40. This provision outlines the Board's regulatory authority over depreciation practices in the utility sector.
Orders by Board respecting rates and charges of utility 44 The Board may make from time to time such orders as it deems just in respect to the tolls, rates and charges to be paid to any public utility for services rendered or facilities pr...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) has authority to set, amend, or rescind utility rates and charges under R.S., c. 380, s. 44, which empowers the Board to regulate tolls, rates, and charges for public utilities.
Power to compel compliance by utility 46 The Board shall have power, after hearing and notice by order in writing, to require and compel every public utility to comply with the provisions of this Act and any municipal ordinance or regulati...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) is granted authority to compel public utilities to comply with the Act, municipal regulations, and their own charters. This power does not exempt utilities from penalties or limit court jurisdiction. Reference: R.S., c. 380, s. 46.
POWERS AND DUTIES OF PUBLIC UTILITIES
AI summary The document outlines the powers and duties of public utilities in Nova Scotia, referencing regulatory bodies like the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) and legislation such as the Public Utilities Act (PUA). It highlights the role of entities like Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENS) and Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NSPI) in energy management and compliance.
Accounts and returns 49 All public utilities shall keep such accounts, make such returns and otherwise render available to the Board all such information in respect of their business and affairs as the Board may from time to time order. R....
AI summary Public utilities in Nova Scotia must maintain accounts and provide returns as ordered by the Board, as per R.S., c. 380, s. 49.
Annual balance sheet - 50 (1) Unless otherwise ordered by the Board, all accounts required to be kept by a public utility shall be closed annually on the last day of December in each year, and a balance sheet of that date shall be promptly...
AI summary The annual balance sheet requirements mandate public utilities to close accounts annually on December 31, prepare a verified balance sheet, and file it with the Board by February 1. The process is governed by R.S., c. 380, s. 50, ensuring compliance with regulatory deadlines and verification protocols.
Duty to furnish information, return forms and deliver documents - 51 (1) Every public utility shall furnish to the Board all information required by it to carry into effect the provisions of this Act, and shall make specific answers to all...
AI summary Public utilities must provide the Board with required information, complete forms accurately, and deliver documents upon request. Non-compliance requires sworn explanations and timely submissions. The Board may demand maps, contracts, and records in specified formats, with inventory details.
Regulations respecting reports - 51A (1) The Governor in Council may make regulations - (a) requiring a public utility to prepare and provide reports to the Minister of Energy and Mines and the Board, or either of them, including such cont...
AI summary The Governor in Council may regulate public utility reporting requirements, mandating reports to the Minister of Energy and Mines and the Board. Public availability of such reports is also governed by these regulations, with references to the Regulations Act, 2015, and O.I.C. 2018-188.
Performance standards for adverse weather conditions - 52A (1) The Board shall establish performance standards for Nova Scotia Power Incorporated in respect of reliability and response to adverse weather conditions. - (2) For the purpose o...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB) is mandated to establish performance standards for Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NSPI) regarding reliability and response to adverse weather conditions. Standards must align with North American utility industry benchmarks, adjusted for provincial conditions, and ensure consistency with North Atlantic seaboard utilities. Regulations and other factors also influence these standards, as per 2015 legislation.
Release of reports related to performance standards 52C Whenever required in connection with any investigation by the Board or a person appointed pursuant to Section 82, Nova Scotia Power Incorporated shall provide the Board with such repo...
AI summary Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NSPI) is legally required to provide detailed reports to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) regarding its compliance with performance standards established by the Board. This obligation is mandated under the 2015, c. 31, s. 31 legislation.
Status reports relating to performance - 52D (1) The Board may require Nova Scotia Power Incorporated to provide it with periodic status reports, at such times and including such information as the Board may require, on Nova Scotia Power I...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) mandates Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NSPI) to submit periodic performance reports on compliance with standards under Sections 52A and 52B. Annual reports are required, and failure to meet standards may result in administrative penalties or compliance plans. The legislation is cited as 2015, c. 31, s. 31.
Administrative penalties - 52E (1) In this Section, "Fuel Adjustment Mechanism" means the fuel adjustment mechanism approved by the Board for use by Nova Scotia Power Incorporated in orders dated December 10, 2007, (Board Case Number M0049...
AI summary The section defines the Fuel Adjustment Mechanism (FAM) and outlines rules for administrative penalties against Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NSPI). Penalties aim to promote compliance, not punitive measures, with an annual cap of $1 million. Penalties must be credited to customers via FAM or other methods, and they are excluded from NSPI's rate of return calculations under the 2015 Act.
Duty to customer respecting pressure and frequency - 56 (1) Before commencing to supply electrical energy to any customer a public utility shall declare, in writing under the hand of its proper officer, or its agent thereunto duly authoriz...
AI summary Public utilities in Nova Scotia must declare the pressure and frequency of electrical energy supply to customers in writing before service commencement. Variations in pressure or frequency at customer terminals must not exceed 4% unless ordered by the Board, regardless of the cause.
Duty to maintain apparatus on premises of customer 57 The public utility shall be responsible for all electric lines, fittings and apparatus belonging to it or under its control upon the customer's premises, being maintained in a proper co...
AI summary The public utility is responsible for maintaining its own electric lines, fittings, and apparatus on customer premises to ensure proper energy supply. However, it is not liable for damages from equipment not under its control. This is outlined in R.S., c. 380, s. 57.
Right of entry onto supplied premises - 61 (1) Any officer or agent of the public utility authorized in writing by the public utility may, for the purpose of - (a) inspecting the electric wires, meters, accumulators, fittings, works and ap...
AI summary The regulation grants public utility officers/agents the right to enter premises supplied by the utility for inspection, removal of equipment, or disconnection of service, provided they cause minimal damage and repair any resulting damage. This is governed by R.S., c. 380, s. 61.
Restriction on general rate increase - 64A (1) In this Section, "utility" means Nova Scotia Power Incorporated. - (2) The utility may not be granted a general rate increase to take effect sooner than twenty-four months following the effect...
AI summary Nova Scotia Power Incorporated is restricted from receiving general rate increases for 24 months after the last increase, with an exception for January 1, 2015. The Board may grant exceptions for exceptional circumstances after hearings, and the matter is subject to appeal. A specific application (Matter No. M04972) is exempt from these restrictions.
Recovery of executive remuneration - 64B (1) In this Section, "report" means the report required by subsection (2). - (2) Nova Scotia Power Incorporated shall submit to the Board - (a) on or before January 1, 2013; and - (b) with each appl...
AI summary Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NSPI) must submit executive remuneration reports to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB). The UARB reviews and approves/rejects these reports, with authority to determine executive compensation details if NSPI fails to comply. NSPI cannot recover bonuses or incentives from approved rates unless prescribed by regulations. 2012, c. 41, s. 4.
Equal rates and charges for similar services - 67 (1) All tolls, rates and charges shall always, under substantially similar circumstances and conditions in respect of service of the same description, be charged equally to all persons and...
AI summary The regulation mandates equal tolls, rates, and charges for similar services under comparable conditions. The Board may define 'similar circumstances' via regulation, and non-compliance is prohibited. This provision is codified in R.S., c. 380, s. 67.
Approval for change of telephone equipment - 70 (1) A public utility that owns, operates, manages or controls, or is incorporated for the purpose of owning, operating, managing or controlling any plant or equipment for the conveyance of te...
AI summary The regulation mandates that public utilities in Nova Scotia require approval from the Board before changing telephone equipment. Approval can be granted ex parte or after a hearing, with conditions set by the Board. The provision references R.S., c. 380, s. 70.
No rate or charge by utility other than as in schedule 71 No public utility shall charge, demand, collect or receive a greater or less compensation for any service performed by it than is prescribed in such schedules as are at the time in...
AI summary The regulation prohibits public utilities from charging rates outside the prescribed schedules, as outlined in R.S., c. 380, s. 71. Utilities must adhere strictly to compensation levels defined in enforceable schedules.
Approval for issue of certain securities - 74 (1) No public utility shall issue any shares, stocks, bonds, debentures or any evidence of indebtedness payable in more than one year from the date thereof, except as in subsection (2) provided...
AI summary Regulatory provisions require public utilities in Nova Scotia to obtain approval from the Board before issuing long-term securities. Exceptions allow limited initial share issuances for organizational purposes, with strict caps on quantity based on par value or nominal capital.
Location of office and books - 76 (1) Each public utility shall have an office in one of the cities, towns or villages of the Province in which its property or some part thereof is located and shall keep in said office all such books, acco...
AI summary Regulatory provisions require public utilities in Nova Scotia to maintain an office within the province where their property is located and to keep all required books and records there. The Board may impose conditions for removing such records from the province, as outlined in R.S., c. 380, s. 76.
Interpretation - 79A In this Section and Sections 79B to 79V, - (a) "affiliate" means an affiliate within the meaning of Companies Act , and includes a person that Nova Scotia Power Incorporated does not deal with at arm's length; - (b) "e...
AI summary Section 79A defines key terms including 'affiliate,' 'electricity efficiency and conservation activities,' and 'franchise.' It references the Electricity Efficiency and Conservation Restructuring (2014) Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (Canada), and the Companies Act. Definitions focus on regulatory frameworks for energy efficiency and conservation programs.
Application for franchise - 79B (1) Upon invitation by the Minister, a person may apply for a franchise. - (2) An applicant for a franchise shall provide the Minister with such information as may be prescribed, in such time and manner as m...
AI summary The document outlines provisions for franchise applications in Nova Scotia, requiring applicants to provide prescribed information upon the Minister's invitation. It explicitly prohibits Nova Scotia Power Incorporated (NSPI) and its affiliates from applying, citing the Electricity Efficiency and Conservation Restructuring (2014) Act.
Information and assistance for new franchise holder - 79E (1) In the event of the termination or expiration of a franchise, the franchise holder shall provide a new franchise holder with the information in its possession or control, includ...
AI summary When a franchise terminates or expires, the franchise holder must provide information and assistance to a new franchise holder or NSPI to ensure uninterrupted electricity efficiency and conservation activities. Confidentiality is required, except for public or legally mandated disclosures. This provision is under the Electricity Efficiency and Conservation Restructuring (2014) Act.
Term of agreement with new franchise holder 79O Notwithstanding clause 79J(2)(a), where an agreement is terminated and a new franchise is granted, the term of the first agreement between the new franchise holder and Nova Scotia Power Incor...
AI summary Clause 79O specifies that when a new franchise is granted after termination, the term includes the balance of the current year plus a three-year term, referencing the 2014 statute, chapter 5, section 15.
Spending and cost-recovery for activities of franchise holder - 79R (1) In making an order approving electricity efficiency and conservation activities pursuant to Section 79Q, the Board shall approve the amount that the franchise holder m...
AI summary The Board approves spending and cost recovery for electricity efficiency activities, capping at $35M adjusted by Efficiency Nova Scotia's 2013 over-recovery. Recovery is deferred over eight years, with performance requirements and payment terms outlined. The EECR Act (2014, c.5, s.15) is referenced.
Order by Minister to assign agreement - 79U (1) The Minister may make an order for the purpose of subsection 79F(1) assigning an agreement as referred to in that subsection, including attaching terms or conditions to any such assignment an...
AI summary The Minister is authorized to assign agreements under subsection 79F(1), including attaching terms/conditions and consequences for non-compliance. This authority is explicitly excluded from being classified as a regulation under the Regulations Act, 2014, c. 5, s. 15.
Regulations - 79V (1) The Governor in Council may make regulations for the purpose of Sections 79A to 79U, including regulations - (a) prescribing activities, programs or plans that are electricity efficiency and conservation activities; -...
AI summary The Governor in Council is authorized under section 79V to create regulations for electricity efficiency and conservation activities, franchise applications, reporting requirements, Board considerations, definitions, and other matters necessary for implementing Sections 79A to 79U. These regulations are governed by the Regulations Act, 2014.
Complaint against public utility - 83 (1) Upon complaint made to the Board against any public utility by any municipal corporation or by any five persons, firms or corporations, that any of the rates, tolls, charges or schedules are in any...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB) is authorized to investigate complaints against public utilities, adjust rates, and ensure service adequacy. The Board may require security deposits from complainants and must hold public hearings before issuing orders. Legal authority is derived from R.S., c. 380, s. 83.
Unjust or unreasonable rate or charge, regulation or service or action - 87 (1) If upon any investigation the rates, tolls, charges or schedules are found to be unjust, unreasonable, insufficient or unjustly discriminatory, or to be prefer...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB) has authority to cancel or adjust rates, tolls, charges, or services deemed unjust, unreasonable, or discriminatory under the Utility and Review Board Act. The Board may also mandate service extensions and set new terms, with specific reference to Revised Statutes, chapter 380, section 87.
Penalty on officer or agent or employee of utility - 111 Any officer, agent or employee of any public utility who - (a) fails or refuses to fill out and return any blanks, as required by this Act; - (b) fails or refuses to answer any quest...
AI summary The text outlines penalties for officers, agents, or employees of public utilities who fail to comply with regulatory requirements, including submitting information, answering questions, maintaining accounting systems, or providing documents to the Board. Penalties range from $200 to $500 per offense, with additional liability for the utility if the individual acted on its behalf.
Penalty on public utility - 112 (1) If any public utility - (a) violates any provision of this Act; - (b) does any act by this Act prohibited; - (c) fails or refuses to perform any duty enjoined upon it for which a penalty has not been pro...
AI summary The section outlines penalties for public utilities violating the Public Utilities Act, imposing a $200 fine per offense, and holds utilities liable for employee actions within their employment scope.
Separate offence 114 Every day during which any public utility, or any officer, agent or employee thereof, fails knowingly or wilfully to observe and comply with any order or direction of the Board, or to perform any duty enjoined by this...
AI summary The text establishes that each day of non-compliance by a public utility or its employees with the Board's orders constitutes a separate offense under the Revised Statutes of Nova Scotia. This provision emphasizes strict adherence to regulatory directives.
Interpretation and construction of Act and powers of Board - 116 (1) This Act shall be interpreted and construed liberally in order to accomplish the purposes thereof, and where any specific power or authority is given the Board by the pro...
AI summary The Act mandates liberal interpretation to achieve its purposes, grants the Board implied powers necessary for its functions, and allows substantial compliance with its requirements. This aligns with the Utility and Review Board Act's provisions, ensuring flexibility in regulatory actions.
Utility and Review Board Act CHAPTER 11 OF THE ACTS OF 1992 as amended by 1995, c. 7; 1998, c. 18, s. 582; 2007, c. 23; 2008, c. 68; 2018, c. 1, Sch. A, s. 153 © 2018 Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of Nova Scotia Published...
AI summary The text outlines Chapter 11 of the Utility and Review Board Act (1992) and its amendments through various legislative changes up to 2018. It highlights the legal framework governing utility regulation in Nova Scotia, emphasizing the role of the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) in overseeing utility matters.
CHAPTER 11 OF THE ACTS OF 1992 amended 1995, c. 7; 1998, c. 18, s. 582; 2007, c. 23; 2008, c. 68; 2018, c. 1, Sch. A, s. 153
AI summary This document outlines amendments to Chapter 11 of the Acts of 1992, including updates from 1995, 1998, 2007, 2008, and 2018. The text focuses on legislative revisions but does not explicitly detail arguments or disputes.
Interpretation - 2 In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, - (a) "Board" means the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board; - (b) "Chair" means the Chair of the Board; - (c) "Clerk" means the Clerk of the Board; - (d) "member" mea...
AI summary Defines terms in the Utility and Review Board Act, including the Board's composition and references to the Public Utilities Act. Establishes definitions for 'Board,' 'Chair,' 'Clerk,' 'member,' 'municipality,' and 'predecessor board,' with a focus on regulatory structure and statutory context.
Chair and Vice-chair 6 (1) The Governor in Council shall designate one of the full-time members to be the Chair of the Board and another full-time member to be the Vicechair. - (2) The Chair has the general supervision and direction over t...
AI summary The Governor in Council designates the Chair and Vice-chair of the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB). The Chair oversees the Board's affairs, while the Vice-chair assumes the Chair's duties in their absence. This is governed by the Utility and Review Board Act, 1992, c. 11, s. 6.
Powers of member - 17 (1) A member may administer oaths or affirmations, certify as to official acts and issue subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of books, accounts, papers, records, documents and testimony....
AI summary Section 17 of the Utility and Review Board Act grants members authority to administer oaths, issue subpoenas, and compel witness testimony. Non-compliance with subpoenas or Board orders may result in contempt proceedings initiated by a Supreme Court judge. This provision underscores the Board's enforcement powers within regulatory proceedings.
Effect of finding 26 The finding or determination of the Board upon a question of fact within its jurisdiction is binding and conclusive. 1992, c. 11, s. 26.
AI summary The Board's factual determinations are binding and conclusive under the Utility and Review Board Act, 1992, c. 11, s. 26. This establishes the legal authority of the Board's findings in regulatory proceedings.
Written decision with reasons - 27 (1) A final decision of the Board shall be in writing and shall set forth reasons for the decision. - (2) The reasons for the final decision shall include - (a) any agreed findings of facts; - (b) the fin...
AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) must issue final decisions in writing with detailed reasons, including agreed findings, evidence-based findings, and legal conclusions. The Clerk certifies and distributes copies to all parties. This requirement is governed by the Utility and Review Board Act, 1992, c. 11, s. 27.
- (4) The Clerk shall forward the certified copy so endorsed to a prothonotary of the Supreme Court, who shall, upon receipt thereof, enter the same as of record, and it thereupon becomes and is an order of the Supreme Court and is enforce...
AI summary The text outlines procedures for converting decisions or orders of the Board into enforceable rules or orders of the Supreme Court, and how subsequent changes to such decisions or orders are treated.
Assessment Act amended 35 amendments
AI summary The Assessment Act has been amended, with 35 specific amendments referenced. The context indicates involvement of regulatory bodies and legal frameworks in Nova Scotia, though no detailed arguments or entities are explicitly mentioned in the provided text.
Municipal Boundaries & Representation Act amended 40 amendments
AI summary The Municipal Boundaries & Representation Act has been amended with 40 changes. The text provides no further details on the nature of the amendments or their implications.
Public Utilities Act amended 43 amendments
AI summary The Public Utilities Act (PUA) has been amended, though specific details of the 43 amendments are not provided in the text. The amendment likely relates to regulatory changes impacting utility services in Nova Scotia.
Periodic report 48 Where the Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities, the Expropriations Compensation Board, the Nova Scotia Municipal Board or the Nova Scotia Tax Review Board is, immediately before the coming into force of this Act, r...
AI summary Section 48 of the Utility and Review Board Act, 1992, ensures that periodic reporting requirements for specified boards continue under the Act, with compliance to be completed as soon as practical after its coming into force.
Continuation of existing matter 49 For greater certainty, every matter before a predecessor board immediately before the coming into force of this Act shall be continued before the Board and, where any such matter has been heard, in whole...
AI summary The text ensures that matters before predecessor boards are continued under the new Board, with hearings by members who are part of the current Board. It references section 49 of the Utility and Review Board Act, 1992, c. 11.
- So, Mr. Speaker, I don't have much of a problem with this going forward to the Law Amendments - Committee but I would like the minister to be able to address some of these concerns because at the - moment the bill is silent on a lot of i...
AI summary A member raises concerns about Bill No. 49's silence on governance and tax credits for Efficiency Nova Scotia, seeking ministerial clarity and amendments. Hon. Cecil Clarke notes the bill's evolution from Dalhousie University's work and highlights media scrutiny over legislative alignment with reality.
9. EFFICIENCYONE'S COVENANTS - 35 9.1 EfficiencyOne warrants, covenants and agrees with NSPI that: - 36 37 (a) it has all requisite capacity and authority to execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement; - 38 39 40 (b)...
AI summary EfficiencyOne's covenants with NSPI include warranties about its legal authority to perform obligations and the enforceability of the agreement. The terms emphasize legal validity and binding obligations under the agreement.
11. CONFIDENTIAL AND PERSONAL INFORMATION - 10 11 11.1 The Parties have executed or agree to execute the confidentiality agreement attached hereto as Schedule "D" - Confidentiality ("Confidentiality Agreement"). - 12 13 14 11.2 EfficiencyO...
AI summary The section outlines a confidentiality agreement between EfficiencyOne and NSPI, requiring EfficiencyOne to secure personal information and indemnify NSPI against liabilities from misuse or disclosure, including contravention of CASL. Schedule D is referenced as the confidentiality agreement.
18. LIENS AND CLAIMS 1 - 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 18.1 EfficiencyOne shall indemnify and hold harmless NSPI, NSPI's parent and their subsidiaries and affiliates (collectively the "Lien Indemnitees" or singularly "Lien Indemnitee") and defend eac...
AI summary Section 18 outlines the obligations of EfficiencyOne regarding liens and claims against NSPI and its affiliates. EfficiencyOne must indemnify and defend NSPI from any claims, liens, or attachments related to work performed under the EECA. EfficiencyOne is also required to discharge such liens promptly, with NSPI having the option to offset costs if EfficiencyOne fails to do so.
E-13-(i)Book of Authorities
88 passages
oceeds of sale — Al‑ berta Energy and Utilities Board Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. A‑17, s. 15(3) — Public Utilities Board Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. P‑45, s. 37 — Gas Utilities Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. G‑5, s. 26(2). ATCO is a public utility in Alberta whi...
AI summary ATCO, an Alberta natural gas utility, applied to sell unused Calgary assets under the Gas Utilities Act, arguing the sale would not harm customers. Proceeds would retire asset book value, cover costs, and distribute profits to shareholders. The City of Calgary opposed shareholder distribution, prioritizing ratepayer interests. The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board and Public Utilities Board Act are cited in the proceeding.
Jurisprudence Citée par le juge Bastarache Arrêts mentionnés : Re ATCO Gas-North , Alta. E.U.B., Décision 2001-65, 31 juillet 2001; TransAlta Utilities Corp. c. Public Utilities Board (Alta.) (1986), 68 A.R. 171; Re TransAlta Utilities Cor...
AI summary The jurisprudence section cites multiple legal cases referenced by Judge Bastarache, including decisions from Alberta’s Energy and Utilities Board (AEUB) and Public Utilities Board (PUBA), as well as Supreme Court of Canada rulings. Key cases involve utility regulation, energy disputes, and administrative law, highlighting precedents related to regulatory authority and utility company obligations.
Lois et règlements cités Alberta Energy and Utilities Board Act, R.S.A. 2000, ch. A-17, art. 13, 15, 26(1), (2), 27. - Gas Utilities Act , R.S.A. 2000, c. G‑5, ss. 16, 17, 22, 24, 26, 27(1), 36 to 45, 59. - Interpretation Act , R.S.A. 2000...
AI summary The document lists Alberta legislation cited in a regulatory proceeding, including the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board Act, Gas Utilities Act, and Public Utilities Board Act, along with specific sections related to energy and utility regulation.
Authors Cited - Anisman, Philip, and Robert F. Reid. Administrative Law Issues and Practice . Scarborough, Ont.: Carswell, 1995. - Black, Alexander J. "Responsible Regulation: Incentive Rates for Natural Gas Pipelines" (1992), 28 Tulsa L.J...
AI summary The document lists legal references and legislation relevant to energy regulation, including works by authors on administrative law, utility rate control, and regulatory frameworks. Key legislation cited includes the Gas Utilities Act, Public Utilities Act, and Public Utilities Board Act.
Doctrine citée - Anisman, Philip, and Robert F. Reid. Administrative Law Issues and Practice . Scarborough, Ont. : Carswell, 1995. - Black, Alexander J. « Responsible Regulation : Incentive Rates for Natural Gas Pipelines » (1992), 28 Tuls...
AI summary The document lists legal references and academic works on administrative law, energy regulation, and utility management. Citations include books, articles, and legal commentaries by authors such as Anisman, Black, and Brown, focusing on regulatory frameworks, judicial review, and economic principles of regulation.
Le secteur de l'énergie et des services publics n'y échappe pas. En l'espèce, l'intimée est un service public albertain de distribution de gaz naturel. Il ne s'agit en fait que d'une société privée assujettie à certaines contraintes réglem...
AI summary The text discusses the regulatory framework for Alberta's natural gas distribution utility, emphasizing its status as a regulated private entity. It highlights the role of the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (AEUB) in approving rates and the economic rationale for regulating natural monopolies. References to academic works and legal reports support arguments about utility regulation and efficiency.
1.1 Overview of the Facts ATCO Gas - South ("AGS"), which is a division of ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd. ("ATCO"), filed an application by letter with the Board pursuant to s. 25.1(2) (now s. 26(2)) of the GUA, for approval of the sale of it...
AI summary ATCO Gas - South applied to sell non-utility land in Calgary, arguing the sale would reduce rates by retiring the asset from the rate base. The Board considered the application without a hearing, while opposing parties contested the disposition of sale proceeds to shareholders.
1.2.1.2 Decision 2002-037, [2002] A.E.U.B.D. No. 52 (QL) In a second decision, the Board determined the allocation of net sale proceeds. It reviewed the regulatory policy and general principles which affected the decision, although no spec...
AI summary The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (AEUB) allocated net sale proceeds using a 'no-harm' test, referencing its 2001-65 decision and the TransAlta Formula. It emphasized protecting consumers by allocating proceeds to mitigate harm, citing the Alberta Court of Appeal's 1986 ruling. The Board concluded a sale would not harm customers due to a favorable lease agreement, though future operational costs were not addressed.
1.2.1.2 Décision 2002-037, [2002] A.E.U.B.D. No. 52 (QL) Dans une deuxième décision, la Commission a décidé de l'attribution du produit net de la vente. Elle a fait état de la politique réglementaire et des principes généraux présidant à l...
AI summary The Commission allocated net proceeds from a sale, referencing the 'absence of prejudice' principle and the TransAlta formula. It emphasized its authority to protect customers, citing Alberta Court of Appeal decisions. The TransAlta formula dictates that when sale prices exceed historical costs, gains are shared between shareholders and customers based on specific ratios.
es to protect the customers from adverse results brought about by any of the utility's transactions by ensuring that the economic benefits to customers are enhanced (MacAvoy and Sidak, at pp. 234-36). While at first blush the purposes of t...
AI summary The text analyzes the interpretation of Alberta's GUA, AEUBA, and PUBA, focusing on whether the Board has jurisdiction to allocate profits from asset sales. It argues that statutory provisions (s. 26(2)(d) GUA, s. 15(3)(d) AEUBA) are not polycentric but require determining if the Board can allocate profits. The Board's role is to ensure just rates, not abstract statutory interpretation. The Court of Appeal's polycentric conclusion is rejected, favoring a less deferential review standard.
2.3.1 General Principles of Statutory Interpretation For a number of years now, the Court has adopted E. A. Driedger's modern approach as the method to follow for statutory interpretation ( Construction of Statutes (2nd ed. 1983), at p. 87...
AI summary The text outlines principles of statutory interpretation, referencing E. A. Driedger's approach and Supreme Court of Canada cases. It discusses administrative law jurisdiction sources and the City's argument that the Commission's authority is both explicit and implicit. The analysis emphasizes interpreting legislative frameworks to determine the Commission's power.
2.3.2 Explicit Powers: Grammatical and Ordinary Meaning As a preliminary submission, the City argues that given that ATCO applied to the Board for approval of both the sale transaction and the disposition of the proceeds of sale, this sugg...
AI summary The City argues that ATCO's application for sale approval implies Board jurisdiction over proceeds allocation, but this is rejected as the application alone does not confirm jurisdiction. Past cases show utility companies challenged the Board's authority to allocate sale proceeds, with references to multiple Board decisions (e.g., Re TransAlta Utilities Corp. , Re ATCO Gas-North ). The analysis focuses on statutory interpretation of GUA and AEUBA provisions.
PUBA 37 Dans les domaines de sa compétence, la Commission peut ordonner et exiger qu'une personne, y compris une administration municipale, immédiatement ou dans le délai qu'elle impartit et selon les modalités qu'elle détermine, à conditi...
AI summary The PUBA and GUA grant the Commission authority to mandate actions by public utilities, including municipalities, and prohibit violations of regulations. Section 26(2) of the GUA prevents asset alienation without Commission approval, though it does not specify conditions for authorization. ATCO argues the Commission can authorize transactions unconditionally, and the law does not require justification for such decisions.
2.3.3 Implicit Powers: Entire Context The provisions at issue are found in statutes which are themselves components of a larger statutory scheme which cannot be ignored: As the product of a rational and logical legislature, the statute is...
AI summary The text discusses statutory interpretation principles, emphasizing that legislative provisions must be understood within their broader context and legislative scheme. Courts must consider the legislature's intent, coherence of the legal framework, and the 'spirit' of enactments, even when provisions appear ambiguous. References to cases and legal doctrines underscore the importance of holistic analysis over literal interpretation.
4- 55). In the same vein, it is useful to refer to the following passage from Bell Canada v. Canada (Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommuni‑ cations Commission) , [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1722, at p. 1756: The powers of any administrative tribun...
AI summary The text discusses the doctrine of 'jurisdiction by necessary implication,' where administrative tribunals may possess powers not explicitly stated in their enabling statutes but necessary to fulfill their statutory mandates. It references Bell Canada v. Canada (1989) and emphasizes judicial interpretation of legislative intent without overstepping into legislative drafting.
2.3.3.1 Historique et contexte général Les services publics sont réglementés en Alberta depuis la création en 1915 de l'organisme appelé Board of Public Utility Commissioners en vertu de la loi intitulée The Public Utilities Act , S.A. 191...
AI summary Public utilities in Alberta have been regulated since 1915 under the Public Utilities Act. The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (AEUB) was formed in 1995 by merging the Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERC) and the Public Utilities Board (PUB), inheriting powers from both the 1915 legislation and the Public Utilities Board Act (PUBA).
2.3.3.2 Établissement des tarifs La réglementation tarifaire a plusieurs objectifs — viabilité, équité et efficacité — qui expliquent le mode de fixation des tarifs : [TRADUCTION] . . . l'entreprise réglementée doit être en mesure de finan...
AI summary Rate regulation in Nova Scotia balances viability, equity, and efficiency. Regulated utilities must ensure financial sustainability while preventing excessive shareholder returns. The 'regulatory compact' grants exclusivity in exchange for reliable service, with legal precedents like Northwestern 1929 cited to support rate-setting principles.
[TRADUCTION] - \ la compétence alléguée est nécessaire à la réalisation des objectifs du régime législatif et essentielle à l'exécution du mandat de la Commission; - \ la loi habilitante ne confère pas expressément le pouvoir de réaliser l...
AI summary The text discusses the legal basis for a Commission's implied authority under legislation, arguing that while the enabling statute does not explicitly grant the power, the Commission's broad mandate suggests tacit authorization. It references legal interpretations, including Sullivan's explanation that broadly defined powers are limited to what is rationally related to their purpose, contrasting with narrowly defined powers.
3. Conclusion 86 This Court's role in this case has been one of interpreting the enabling statutes using the appropriate interpretive tools, i.e., context, legislative intention and objective. Going further than required by reading in unne...
AI summary The court interprets enabling statutes, emphasizing that the Board overstepped its jurisdiction by allocating asset sale proceeds. The decision to dismiss the City's appeal and allow ATCO's cross-appeal is based on the Board's failure to meet the correctness standard. The dissenting opinion highlights concerns about utility companies' mixed business operations and the Board's policies on land speculation.
A. Les pouvoirs légaux de la Commission La première question qui se pose est celle de la compétence. D'où la Commission tient-elle le pouvoir de rendre l'ordonnance que conteste ATCO? La réponse de la Commission comporte trois volets. Le p...
AI summary The Commission asserts authority under the Gas Utilities Act (GUA) and Public Utilities Board Act (PUBA) to regulate ATCO Gas - South's property sale in Calgary. Key provisions include GUA 22(1) (general oversight) and 26(2)d)(i) (approval requirement for asset transfers). The Commission claims power to impose conditions on approvals, citing Decision 2002-037.
en dans le cadre d'une procédure ultérieure. Elle a donc conclu à l'absence de préjudice et décidé que la vente pouvait avoir lieu. [Soulignements et italiques ajoutés.] (Décision 2002-037, par. 13) ATCO fait abstraction de ce qui figure e...
AI summary The Commission approved the sale, allocating one-third of the net gain to ATCO and two-thirds to ratepayers. The Board emphasized balancing shareholder and ratepayer interests under the 'regulatory compact,' ensuring incentives for efficiency and preventing speculative behavior. ATCO argued the Commission was functus officio post-first hearing stage, but the Board had agreed to a two-phase process.
le réponse appropriée. La méthode du caractère manifestement déraisonnable signifie que de nombreuses réponses appropriées étaient possibles, sauf celle donnée par le décideur. ( S.C.F.P. , par. 164) Cela dit, il importe peu à mon sens que...
AI summary The text discusses the legal standard of 'manifestly unreasonable' versus 'reasonable simpliciter' in regulatory decisions, emphasizing the Commission's authority to impose conditions in the public interest. It critiques ATCO's argument about 'confiscatory' conditions, asserting that statutory authority, not market speculation, determines just returns. The focus is on the Board's jurisdictional exercise rather than its existence.
F. ATCO's Arguments Most of ATCO's principal submissions have already been touched on but I will repeat them here for convenience. ATCO does not really dispute the Board's ability to impose conditions on the sale of land. Rather, ATCO says...
AI summary ATCO challenges the Board's decision to allocate profit from land sales to customers, arguing customers lack proprietary rights in corporate assets, profit retention is unrelated to the regulatory compact, and depreciation on land isn't included in the rate base. It claims retroactive rate setting and seeks judicial intervention.
ré de la vente des terrains dont la valeur s'était appréciée, mais la cour d'appel a infirmé la décision en tenant un raisonnement directement applicable à l'effet « confiscatoire » allégué par ATCO : [TRADUCTION] Nous ne voyons aucun obst...
AI summary The court rejected the confiscatory effect argument, allowing clients to benefit from property appreciation during public service allocation. It cited outdated precedents like Board of Public Utility Commissioners v. New York Telephone Co. , 271 U.S. 23 (1976), which ATCO relied on, but noted these principles have lost relevance. The decision emphasizes property rights and evolving legal-economic frameworks.
2. The Regulatory Compact The Board referred in its decision to the "regulatory compact" which is a loose expression suggesting that in exchange for a statutory monopoly Cette considération liée aux « risques » vaut également en Alberta. P...
AI summary The regulatory compact in Alberta ensures that customers guarantee ATCO a fair return on land and buildings, even as risks and gains are shared. This approach, similar to the SoCalGas case, rejects ATCO's claim of 'confiscatory' profit allocation. The Board emphasizes that profit distribution is context-dependent and that the Commission's decision should not be overturned.
2. Le pacte réglementaire Dans sa décision, la Commission renvoie au « pacte réglementaire », notion aux contours flous selon laquelle, en contrepartie d'un monopole 133 134 and receipt of revenue on a cost plus basis, the utility accepts...
AI summary The document discusses the 'regulatory compact' concept, where utilities accept profit limitations in exchange for monopoly rights and cost-plus revenue. ATCO argues that the Board's profit allocation violates this compact through 'retroactive rate making,' citing the Gas Utilities Act and a Supreme Court of Canada case emphasizing prospective rate-setting.
ion between the gain on sale of depreciable, as compared to nondepreciable, property, stating: "We see little reason why land sales should be treated differently" (p. 107). The decision continued: 142 In short, whether an asset is deprecia...
AI summary The text discusses the regulatory treatment of gains from selling depreciable vs. non-depreciable assets, emphasizing that ratepayers pay returns on book value regardless of depreciation status. It cites cases like Re California Water Service Co. and Re Boston Gas Co. , arguing that regulators often treat non-depreciable land (e.g., bare land) similarly to depreciable assets. The Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (AEUB) and ATCO are mentioned in the context of this debate.
[TRADUCTION]
AI summary The document is a translation of a regulatory proceeding in Nova Scotia, involving energy and utility legislation, including references to Alberta, Ontario, and Quebec legal frameworks. Key entities include regulatory boards, utility companies, and legal reports.
Designated gas utilities - 26(1) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may by regulation designate those owners of gas utilities to which this section and section 27 apply. - (2) No owner of a gas utility designated under subsection (1) shall...
AI summary Section 26(1) allows the Lieutenant Governor in Council to designate gas utility owners under the Gas Utilities Act. Designated owners must obtain Board approval for issuing shares/bonds, capitalizing rights, leasing, or disposing of property. The Board's authorization is required for these corporate actions and asset-related decisions.
Services de gaz désignés - 26(1) Le lieutenant-gouverneur en conseil peut, par règlement, désigner les propriétaires de services de gaz assujettis au présent article et à l'article 27. - (2) Le propriétaire d'un service de gaz désigné en a...
AI summary Section 26 regulates designated gas utilities in Nova Scotia, requiring Commission approval for actions like issuing securities, capitalizing rights, or merging. Unauthorized transactions are void unless part of normal business operations. The lieutenant-governor in council designates these utilities under subsection (1).
Powers of Board 36 The Board, on its own initiative or on the application of a person having an interest, may by order in writing, which is to be made after giving notice to and hearing the parties interested, - (a) fix just and reasonable...
AI summary The Board may set gas utility rates, depreciation methods, and service standards, requiring compliance. A French clause restricts share transfers exceeding 50% ownership without Commission approval, aiming to prevent monopolistic control.
Pouvoirs de la Commission 36 La Commission peut, d'office ou à la demande d'un intéressé, par ordonnance écrite, après avoir donné un avis aux personnes intéressées et les avoir entendues, - a) fixer des tarifs individuels ou conjoints, de...
AI summary The Commission has authority to set gas utility rates, establish depreciation methods, enforce infrastructure maintenance, and mandate service standards. It may also require gas suppliers to deliver gas under specified terms, ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements and fair practices.
Pouvoirs généraux 37 Dans les domaines de sa compétence, la Commission peut ordonner et exiger qu'une personne, y compris une administration municipale, immédiatement ou dans le délai qu'elle impartit et selon les modalités qu'elle détermi...
AI summary The Commission has broad powers to require individuals or municipal administrations to comply with laws, regulations, or directives, within specified timeframes, and to prohibit actions that violate these legal frameworks. These powers are exercised within the Commission's jurisdiction and must align with applicable legislation.
Enquêtes sur les services publics et les tarifs - 80 Lorsqu'il lui est démontré à l'audition d'une demande présentée par le propriétaire d'une entreprise de services publics ou par une municipalité ou une personne ayant un intérêt actuel o...
AI summary The Commission has authority under the PUBA to investigate utility rates if they are deemed excessive or unreasonable, adjust tolls, and ensure service quality. It may consider existing contracts between utilities and municipalities when making decisions.
Investigation of public utility 87(1) The Board may, on its own initiative, or on the application of a person having an interest, investigate any matter concerning a public utility. . . . - (2) When in the opinion of the Board it is necess...
AI summary The Public Utilities Board (PUB) has authority to investigate public utilities, access documents, and regulate rates. It may modify excessive or discriminatory rates and requires compliance from utility owners and controllers. The process involves examining service quality, rates, and related charges.
Fixing of rates 89 The Board, either on its own initiative or on the application of a person having an interest, may by order in writing, which is to be made after giving notice to and hearing the parties interested, - (a) fix just and rea...
AI summary The Board has authority to fix rates, depreciation methods, service standards, and require facility extensions for public utilities. It may act on its own initiative or upon application, ensuring compliance with legal provisions and financial feasibility.
Incessibilité des actions 102(1) Sauf ordonnance de la Commission l'y autorisant, le propriétaire d'une entreprise de services publics désignée en application du paragraphe 101(1) s'abstient de vendre tout ou partie des actions de son capi...
AI summary The provision prohibits the owner of a designated public utility company from selling shares to another company if it would result in the latter owning more than 50% of the shares, unless the Commission authorizes it. The Interpretation Act, R.S.A. 2000, ch. I-8, is referenced.
Counsel: Ian Blue, Q.C., and Elizabeth E. May, for Flamborough Residents Against Propane Inc. and David L. Hitchcock H. Dahme, for Corporation of the Town of Flamborough and the Regional Municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth. John A. Olah, fo...
AI summary A regulatory proceeding involving multiple stakeholders, including residents, municipalities, conservation authorities, industry groups, and legal representatives, with counsel listed for various parties. The proceeding likely pertains to energy or public utility matters, given the involvement of pipeline companies and regulatory bodies.
upon the various issues before the court. In the majority of cases where there is a clear winner and a clear loser, the court will award costs to follow the event, that is to say, the loser will be ordered to pay the winner's costs. In oth...
AI summary The text discusses the allocation of costs in regulatory cases, contrasting traditional court practices with regulatory tribunals' discretion. It highlights that intervenor funding differs from court costs, referencing an Ontario Divisional Court case where a regulatory board's jurisdiction to award costs was quashed. The case Re Regional Mpty of Hamilton-Wentworth (1985) is cited, emphasizing the distinction between 'court costs' and 'intervenor funding' under the Consolidated Hearings Act of Ontario.
t that Parliament has expressly conferred the power on the Board to award costs in specific situations, strengthens the position of those parties who argue against the Board's general jurisdiction. In my view, the maxim, expressio unius es...
AI summary The text discusses the interpretation of legislative sections 29.6 and 75.21, arguing that Parliament's explicit granting of cost-awarding powers in specific situations limits the Board's jurisdiction to those scenarios. The legal principle expressio unius est exclusio alterius is invoked to support this, rejecting F.R.A.P.'s broader interpretation of the Board's authority.
CONCLUSION - [17] I have concluded, for all of the foregoing reasons, that except in the very special circumstances referred to, the Board has no jurisdiction to award costs and, more particularly, no jurisdiction to award the more extraor...
AI summary The conclusion asserts that the regulatory board lacks jurisdiction to award costs under the relevant statute, emphasizing statutory interpretation and the absence of enabling language. It acknowledges intervenor funding benefits but states jurisdiction is a policy matter for Parliament, citing the National Energy Board as an example of a board without such jurisdiction.
n to do that thing generally it may be taken that any such general power has been withheld; for the simple reason that if the general power existed the grant of the special power would be superfluous. The provisions to which I have referre...
AI summary The text discusses railway company obligations under section 284, requiring adequate facilities for traffic handling, and the Board's authority to enforce compliance. The respondent relies on sections 284 and 317, emphasizing the company's duty to provide services and the Board's power to mandate specific works if obligations are unmet. The case references the 1910 Grand Trunk Ry. Co. matter and Justice Duff's ruling.
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65 APPEAL HEARD: December 4, 5, 6, 2018 JUDGMENT RENDERED: December 19, 2019 DOCKET: 37748 BETWEEN: Minister of Citizenship and Immigra...
AI summary The Supreme Court of Canada ruled on judicial review standards in immigration decisions, with the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration appealing a lower court decision. The case involved multiple interveners, including provincial attorneys general and legal organizations, focusing on administrative law principles and the scope of judicial oversight.
on) v. Vavilov 2019 SCC 65 File No.: 37748. 2018: December 4, 5, 6; 2019: December 19. Present: Wagner C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon, Côté, Brown, Rowe and Martin JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL Administrat...
AI summary The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) case 2019 SCC 65 examines whether the Registrar of Citizenship's decision to cancel a Canadian-born individual's citizenship certificate, due to his parents being Russian spies, was reasonable under the Citizenship Act. The case involves interpreting statutory exceptions to Canadian citizenship rules and the reasonableness of administrative decisions.
Nishi v. Rascal Trucking Ltd. , 2013 SCC 33, [2013] 2 S.C.R. 438; R. v. Henry , 2005 SCC 76, [2005] 3 S.C.R. 609; Binus v. The Queen , [1967] S.C.R. 594; Bilski v. Kappos, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director,...
AI summary The document lists numerous legal cases cited in a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding, including Supreme Court of Canada decisions, U.S. Supreme Court rulings, and other appellate court judgments. These cases span areas such as administrative law, intellectual property, and regulatory compliance, providing precedents relevant to the proceeding's legal arguments.
and Evidence of the Standing Committee on Broadcasting, Films and Assistance to the Arts, Respecting Bill C-20, An Act respecting citizenship , No. 34, 1st Sess., 30th Parl., February 24, 1976, 34:23. - Coady, Jonathan M. "The Time Has Com...
AI summary The text lists legal references and academic works on administrative law, judicial review, and constitutional principles, including articles by scholars like Paul Daly and Thomas Cromwell, and legislative materials such as Bill C-20. These sources discuss standards of review, deference, and legal precedent in Canadian administrative law.
of determining the standard of review and its proper application, litigants "still find the merits waiting in the wings for their chance to be seen and reviewed": Wilson , at para. 25, per Abella J. [22] As noted in CHRC , this Court "has...
AI summary The text discusses the standard of review in legal proceedings, emphasizing the need to simplify its application to focus on substantive merits rather than procedural tests. It references cases like Wilson and CHRC , highlighting judicial efforts to make the law more coherent and workable through principled changes.
(1) Legislated Standards of Review - [34] Any framework rooted in legislative intent must, to the extent possible, respect clear statutory language that prescribes the applicable standard of review. This Court has consistently affirmed tha...
AI summary The text emphasizes that courts must adhere to legislated standards of review as prescribed by statutes, citing multiple Supreme Court of Canada cases. It highlights British Columbia's Administrative Tribunals Act, which mandates the 'correctness' standard for statutory interpretation by tribunals, and underscores judicial obligation to respect legislative designations within the rule of law.
thout having to conduct a preliminary assessment regarding whether a particular interpretation raises a "truly" or "narrowly" jurisdictional issue and without having to apply the correctness standard. [68] Reasonableness review does not gi...
AI summary The text discusses the application of the reasonableness standard in reviewing administrative decisions, emphasizing statutory constraints on agencies' authority. It references the U.S. Supreme Court's Arlington case, arguing that agencies cannot exceed legislative intent, and that statutory language—whether precise or broad—limits interpretive flexibility.
[98] As for Alberta Teachers , it concerned a very specific and exceptional circumstance in which the reviewing court had exercised its discretion to consider a question of statutory interpretation on judicial review, even though that ques...
AI summary The text discusses the Alberta Teachers case, emphasizing that reasonableness review requires administrative decisions to have intelligible reasons, not just outcomes. It rejects reformulating decisions to replace the tribunal's rationale with the court's own, stressing the importance of transparent justification. The Supreme Court of Canada reaffirmed that deference under reasonableness is tied to the quality of reasons provided.
(2) A Reasonable Decision Is Justified in Light of the Legal and Factual Constraints That Bear on the Decision [105] In addition to the need for internally coherent reasoning, a decision, to be reasonable, must be justified in relation to...
AI summary The text emphasizes that administrative decisions must be reasonable, considering legal and factual constraints. It references cases like Dunsmuir, Catalyst, and Nor-Man Regional Health Authority, highlighting elements such as statutory schemes, evidence, past practices, and the impact on individuals as factors influencing reasonableness.
(a) Governing Statutory Scheme [108] Because administrative decision makers receive their powers by statute, the governing statutory scheme is likely to be the most salient aspect of the legal context relevant to a particular decision. Tha...
AI summary Administrative decision-makers must adhere to statutory schemes, as they cannot override laws enacted by legislatures. Discretion is bounded by statutory purposes and constraints, with judicial precedents emphasizing compliance. Key cases include Catalyst , Green , and Roncarelli v. Duplessis , underscoring that discretion is not absolute and must align with legislative intent.
(c) Principles of Statutory Interpretation [115] Matters of statutory interpretation are not treated uniquely and, as with other questions of law, may be evaluated on a reasonableness standard. Although the general approach to reasonablene...
AI summary Statutory interpretation in regulatory proceedings is assessed using a reasonableness standard. Courts require additional guidance as they typically handle such issues at first instance or on appeal, necessitating independent analysis.
(e) Submissions of the Parties - [127] The principles of justification and transparency require that an administrative decision maker's reasons meaningfully account for the central issues and concerns raised by the parties. The principle t...
AI summary The text emphasizes that administrative decisions must meaningfully address central issues raised by parties to ensure procedural fairness and transparency. Courts recognize that decision-makers need not respond to every argument, but failing to engage with key concerns may undermine the decision's legitimacy. This is grounded in principles like the right to be heard and the importance of responsive reasoning.
lay, applied for mandamus , a process that was settled out of court in June 2013. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration undertook to issue a new travel document to Mr. Vavilov by July 19, 2013. [151] However, Mr. Vavilov never receiv...
AI summary Mr. Vavilov applied for a travel document, leading to a 2013 out-of-court settlement. Despite this, he received a procedural fairness letter revoking his citizenship certificate under the Citizenship Act and Citizenship Regulations, with formal cancellation in 2014.
ts was a citizen or lawfully admitted to Canada for permanent residence and either parent was "a diplomatic or consular officer or other representative or employee in Canada of a foreign government." [153] For these reasons, the Registrar...
AI summary The Registrar cancelled Mr. Vavilov's citizenship certificate, citing his parents' employment with the Russian Federation under s. 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act. The decision relied on a junior analyst's report concluding the certificate was issued in error due to his parents' status as foreign government employees during his birth.
review for the Registrar's interpretation and application of s. 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act was reasonableness. It split, however, on the application of that standard to the Registrar's decision. [167] The majority of the Court of Appea...
AI summary The majority of the Court of Appeal found the Registrar's interpretation of s. 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act unreasonable, arguing it ignored the provision's purpose and context. They concluded the clause applies only to individuals with diplomatic privileges, which Mr. Vavilov's parents lacked, invalidating his citizenship cancellation.
(a) Section 3(2) of the Citizenship Act [174] The analyst justified her conclusion that Mr. Vavilov is not a citizen of Canada by reasoning that his parents were "other representative[s] or employee[s] in Canada of a foreign government" wi...
AI summary The analyst concluded Mr. Vavilov's parents qualified as 'other representatives or employees' under s. 3(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act, exempting their child from Canadian citizenship. However, the court emphasized that s. 3(2)(c)'s requirement for diplomatic privileges creates tension, which the analyst overlooked. The statutory context suggests all s. 3(2)(a) individuals must have diplomatic immunities, challenging the analyst's interpretation.
er would lose jurisdiction. The first was narrow and asked whether the legislature had empowered the administrative decision-maker to "enter on the inquiry in question" (p. 171). The second was wider: [T]here are many cases where, although...
AI summary The text discusses the concept of jurisdictional errors in administrative law, referencing cases where courts substituted their interpretation of statutes over administrative tribunals. It highlights the Supreme Court of Canada's approach in cases like Metropolitan Life and Bell v. Ontario Human Rights Commission , emphasizing the court's role in interpreting enabling provisions and the implications for administrative decisions.
s must influence the standard of review analysis, there is no principled reason why Parliament's decision via privative clauses to prohibit appeals should not be given comparable effect. 2 [249] In any event, legislatures in this country h...
AI summary The analysis challenges the retroactive interpretation of statutory 'appeal' terms, emphasizing that legislatures have long recognized the Supreme Court's non-determinative view of appeals regarding standard of review. It cites Pezim and Crevier to argue legislatures must comply with existing common law, and references British Columbia's statutory standards approach. The Attorney General of Canada's position in Bell Canada v. Canada is aligned with respecting prescribed standards of review.
but not clearly expressed in written reasons. Quashing decisions in such circumstances defeats the purpose of deference and thwarts access to justice by wasting administrative and judicial resources. [305] In our view, therefore, if an app...
AI summary The text discusses judicial review standards for administrative decisions, emphasizing that courts must assess whether omitted factors rendered a decision unreasonable, not automatically conduct de novo reviews. It stresses deference to administrative bodies, even in statutory interpretation, citing Paul Daly's work on unreasonable legal interpretations.
lov and his brother travelled to Russia. The American government subsequently revoked Mr. Vavilov's passport and citizenship. In December 2010, he was issued a Russian passport and birth certificate. - [319] From 2010 to 2013, Mr. Vavilov...
AI summary Mr. Vavilov, born in Canada, obtained a citizenship certificate in 2013 but faced revocation in 2014 due to his parents' status under s. 3(2) of the Citizenship Act. He argued the exception in s. 3(2) did not apply and that procedural fairness was violated. The Registrar revoked the certificate, citing statutory restrictions related to his parents' employment with Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service.
n Intervener Indexed as: Reference re Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2010-167 and Broadcasting Order CRTC 2010-168 2012 SCC 68 File No.: 34231. 2012: April 17; 2012: December 13. Present: McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abe...
AI summary Supreme Court of Canada case (2012 SCC 68) involving Cogeco, Rogers, TELUS, and Shaw (appellants) challenging CRTC's 2010 broadcasting regulatory policy and order. Bell Media and others (respondents) opposed the challenge. CRTC intervened. The case addresses broadcasting regulation and legal proceedings under the Broadcasting Act and Federal Courts Act.
Cases Cited By Rothstein J. Referred to: Bell ExpressVu Limited Partnership v. Rex , 2002 SCC 42, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 559; Reference re Broadcasting Act , 2012 SCC 4, [2012] 1 S.C.R. 142; Barrie Public Utilities v. Canadian Cable Television As...
AI summary The text analyzes legal arguments involving broadcasting licensing, copyright law, and regulatory compliance, citing Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) cases. It discusses whether a proposed regime conflicts with the Copyright Act and the CRTC's mandate, emphasizing that EDRs must comply with licensing conditions under the Broadcasting Act without infringing copyright obligations.
J.A. (Layden-Stevenson J.A. Concurring) - [9] Sharlow J.A., writing for the majority, found the proposed regime to be within the statutory authority of the CRTC. She found that the Broadcasting Act ainsi que le droit d'obliger les EDR à re...
AI summary The CRTC's proposed regime under the Broadcasting Act is challenged by EDR, citing conflicts with the Copyright Act. The majority opinion supports CRTC's authority, referencing the 2010 policy. EDR argues the regime conflicts with the Copyright Act, leading to a referral to the Federal Court of Appeal.
III. Analyse [11] La portée de la compétence conférée au CRTC par la Loi sur la radiodiffusion doit être to the modern approach to statutory interpretation. Per Elmer A. Driedger's formulation, adopted multiple times by this Court, the wor...
AI summary The analysis discusses interpreting the CRTC's authority under the Broadcasting Act using the modern approach to statutory interpretation, emphasizing context, grammar, and Parliament's intent, as outlined by Driedger and applied in Bell ExpressVu.
[12] In addition, . . . where the provision under consideration is found in an Act that is itself a component of a larger statutory scheme, the surroundings that colour the words and the scheme of the Act are more expansive.
AI summary The text emphasizes that when interpreting a provision within an Act, the broader statutory scheme and surrounding context must be considered, as they provide a more expansive framework for understanding the provision's intent and application.
( Bell ExpressVu , at para. 27) The entire context of the provision thus includes not only its immediate context but also other legislation that may inform its meaning (R. Sullivan, Sullivan on the Construction of Statutes (5th ed. 2008),...
AI summary The analysis argues that the Broadcasting Act does not authorize the CRTC to create exclusive rights for broadcasters over signal retransmission, as this would conflict with the Copyright Act . The interpretation considers the legislative context and statutory intent.
[12] De plus : . . . lorsque la disposition litigieuse fait partie d'une loi qui est elle-même un élément d'un cadre législatif plus large, l'environnement qui colore les mots employés dans la loi et le cadre dans lequel celle-ci s'inscrit...
AI summary The text argues that interpreting the Broadcasting Act in its broader legislative context shows it does not authorize the CRTC to implement a compensation regime for signal value. This is because the Act does not grant exclusive rights to broadcasters, and the proposed regime conflicts with specific provisions of the Copyright Act.
[21] In its 2010 Policy, the CRTC determined: . . . in order to fulfil the policy objectives set out in section 3(1) of the Act, the system needs revision so as to permit privately-owned television broadcasters to negotiate with BDUs to es...
AI summary The CRTC's 2010 Policy aimed to revise the system to enable fair value negotiations between privately-owned broadcasters and BDUs. It references a Supreme Court of Canada decision emphasizing the cultural objectives of the Broadcasting Act. The compensation regime grants broadcasters exclusive rights to demand signal removal from EDRs to secure compensation.
(2) Types of Conflict [41] For the purposes of statutory interpretation, conflict is defined narrowly. It has been said that overlapping provisions will be given effect according to their terms, unless they "cannot stand together" ( Toront...
AI summary Statutory interpretation defines conflict narrowly, requiring laws to be directly contradictory or lead to absurd results to be repugnant. Cases like Toronto Railway Co. v. Paget and Lévis (City) v. Fraternité des policiers de Lévis Inc. emphasize that overlapping provisions coexist unless they cannot. The CRTC's regulatory authority is constrained by federal laws like the Loi sur la radiodiffusion and Loi sur le droit d'auteur .
(2) Types de conflits [41] En matière d'interprétation des lois, la notion de conflit est définie étroitement. Il a été jugé que des dispositions qui se chevauchent seront appliquées suivant leur libellé, à moins qu'elles [TRADUCTION] « ne...
AI summary The text discusses legal conflicts between statutes, emphasizing that overlapping provisions are applied based on their wording unless they cannot coexist. Key cases include Toronto Railway Co. v. Paget and Lévis (Ville) v. Fraternité des policiers de Lévis Inc. , where courts clarified that conflicts arise only when laws are directly contradictory or lead to absurd outcomes, such as in Massicotte v. Boutin .
la retransmission simultanée des œuvres, alors que la Loi sur le droit d'auteur exclut expressément ce droit de contrôle dans le cas des titulaires du droit d'auteur, y compris les radiodiffuseurs. [70] Je le répète, bien que l'exception é...
AI summary The text discusses a conflict between the Copyright Act's exception for retransmission of works and a regulatory regime's compensation framework. The court emphasizes that the exception aims to balance copyright holders' rights with public interest, but the compensation regime risks undermining this balance by nullifying the exception's purpose.
Analyse [92] La question précise qui nous est soumise dans le renvoi nous invite à décider si le CRTC a compétence, en vertu de la Loi sur la radiodiffusion , pour mettre en œuvre le nouveau régime. Considérée isolément, la loi en question...
AI summary The court examines whether the CRTC has jurisdiction under the Broadcasting Act to implement a new regime, considering potential conflicts with the Copyright Act. It concludes there's no direct conflict, as the Broadcasting Act's provisions can coexist with the Copyright Act's objectives.
ime. - [124] The BDUs also make policy arguments, submitting that giving local stations the ability to block their signals, as well as the extra compensation to local stations, will increase costs and les trois ans et fait l'objet de la su...
AI summary BDUs argue that allowing local stations to block signals and providing extra compensation would increase costs. The CRTC's 2010 policy is cited, emphasizing ongoing monitoring. The regimes are not functionally equivalent, countering the dissenting federal court judge's claim.
Summary - [1] In January, 2006, Kelly Buryniuk, an Edmonton pawnshop owner, initiated a test case by complaining to the Information and Privacy Commissioner about the City of Edmonton's Business Licence Bylaw which requires pawnshops to co...
AI summary Kelly Buryniuk, an Edmonton pawnshop owner, challenged the City of Edmonton's Business Licence Bylaw requiring pawnshops to collect and share personal pawnor information with the Edmonton Police Service. The Information and Privacy Commissioner ruled the bylaw violated privacy rights, citing the city's lack of authority and inadequate safeguards for personal data managed by Business Watch International Inc.
Cases and authority cited - [8] By the City of Edmonton: City of Edmonton Business License Bylaw 13138; Decision of the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner dated February 15, 2008; Excerpts from the Freedom of Information an...
AI summary The City of Edmonton and Edmonton Police Service cite legal documents including bylaws, acts, and court decisions related to privacy, municipal governance, and regulatory compliance. Key references include privacy legislation, municipal acts, and Supreme Court of Canada decisions.
f each good; and, - the name of the person working in the pawnshop who conducted the transaction. - [15] Sections 40 and 40.8 of the Bylaw state: The information required to be recorded by this Part:
AI summary Sections 40 and 40.8 of the Bylaw require recording specific transaction details, including the name of the pawnshop employee involved in the transaction. The focus is on documenting information related to goods handled in pawnshops.
ALBERTA
AI summary Document context focuses on Alberta's energy and utilities regulatory framework, listing acronyms related to legislation, boards, and programs. Key entities include Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (AEUB), Public Utilities Board (PUB), and relevant acts like the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board Act (AEUBA).
OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDERS F2007-001, F2007-002, P2007-001 February 15, 2008
AI summary The Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner issued three orders (F2007-001, F2007-002, P2007-001) on February 15, 2008, though the specific details of the proceedings or decisions are not provided in the text.
I. BACKGROUND - [para 1] Municipal Bylaw 13138 requires pawnshops and second-hand stores in Edmonton to record the personal information of individuals who pawn or sell items. The bylaw also requires pawnshops and second-hand stores to "mak...
AI summary Edmonton's Bylaw 13138 requires pawnshops to collect personal data and share it with BWI, a private company. A complainant challenged this, questioning the legality of data collection by the City, EPS, and BWI. The Ontario Court of Appeal's 2007 decision in Cash Converters Canada v. Oshawa influenced the inquiry, with parties submitting written arguments on privacy laws like the Municipal Freedom of Information and Privacy Protection Act.
n 40(b) or 40.8(b). [para 25] In ATCO Gas & Pipelines Ltd. v. Alberta (Energy & Utilities Board) , [2006] 1 S.C.R. 140, Bastarache J., writing for the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada, noted: Few areas of our lives are now untouched...
AI summary The Supreme Court of Canada, in ATCO Gas & Pipelines Ltd. v. Alberta (Energy & Utilities Board) , emphasized that regulatory bodies must operate within their statutory authority, underscoring that actions outside legislative frameworks are legally invalid.
an that disclosure of the personal information collected under the bylaw is not an invasion of personal privacy, and even if it were, there would be few consequences in the event of a security breach. [para 39] I find that the information...
AI summary The bylaw requires collecting sensitive personal information, which may constitute an unreasonable invasion of privacy under the FOIP Act unless section 40 applies. Section 33 of the Act restricts such collection unless authorized by law, for law enforcement, or directly related to a public body's operations.
a or a public body and is collected for that purpose, - (l) the information is collected for the purpose of informing the Public Trustee or the Public Guardian about clients or potential clients,
AI summary The text outlines the purpose of collecting information for the Public Trustee and Public Guardian to inform them about clients or potential clients. It emphasizes the collection is for specific regulatory purposes under Nova Scotia's legal framework.
. In such a situation, the public body has a duty to safeguard the information under the FOIP Act. - [para 62] Under the system established by the directive, in which information is collected by a pawnshop or second-hand store and uploaded...
AI summary The City of Edmonton is required under the FOIP Act to safeguard personal information, but provided no evidence of security measures for data collected via the BWI database. The court rejected EPS's argument that PIPA's non-application would create confusion, emphasizing the City's failure to prove compliance with security obligations under the directive.
Case File Number P0363 Issue G: Is the Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA) inapplicable to the Complainant's personal information because the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the FOIP Act) applies, by virtue of...
AI summary The case examines whether the Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA) applies to the Complainant's data, given the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP Act) applies. The analysis concludes PIPA does not apply because FOIP Act governs the City's custody of the data, rendering further PIPA-related issues moot.
Case File Number 3561 - [para 110] I require the City to cease collecting personal information contrary to the FOIP Act. To comply, the City must cease requiring pawnshop and second-hand stores to upload personal information to the BWI dat...
AI summary The court orders the City to stop collecting personal information under the FOIP Act, destroy the BWI database, and comply with section 38 regarding pawnshop/second-hand store data. Compliance must be certified via statutory declaration within 50 days.
Analysis [10] The applicant argues that s. 35 of the Constitution Act compelled the SDAB to consider the issue of adequacy of consultation with the Band which the applicant represents. Much of the argument advanced by the applicant related...
AI summary The applicant asserts that s. 35 of the Constitution Act mandates the SDAB to assess consultation adequacy with the Band. The respondent acknowledges the legal duty to consult when aboriginal rights are infringed, citing Delgamuukw v. British Columbia [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010. The obligation to consult is tied to justifying infringement of aboriginal or treaty rights.