skip to main content
Back to all blog posts

Posted in: Ontario | Practice & Procedure | Facilities

Jan 16, 2018

Ontario Court of Appeal Finds That Gas Utility’s Franchise Agreement Prevails Over Drainage Act

By David Stevens

In a decision released on January 10, 2018, the Ontario Court of Appeal found in favour of Union Gas on the question of whether the cost sharing provisions of a model franchise agreement apply to the relocation of a gas pipeline necessitated by drainage works. The Court found that the provisions of the municipal franchise agreement override the Drainage Act, and require a municipality to share relocation costs with the gas utility where the relocation results from drainage works.

The Union Gas Limited v Norwich (Township) case arose over a dispute between the gas utility and a municipality over whether the parties must share the costs of relocating part of a gas work required because of the municipality’s construction of drainage works. Under the provisions of the Drainage Act, the utility is required to pay the full costs of relocation. However, the terms of the municipal franchise agreement between the parties indicate that the municipality is required to reimburse the utility for 35% of gas relocation costs necessitated by municipal works.

The Court found that the municipal franchise agreement cost sharing provisions operated as an exception to the Drainage Act. In coming to this determination, the Court held that parties can contract out of the benefits conferred by a statute unless this would be contrary to public policy or the wording of the statute specifically prohibits this. The Court considered the cost sharing provisions of the municipal franchise agreement (which is a standard form applicable across Ontario) and found that they displace the Drainage Act requirement that the utility pay all costs. In coming to this conclusion, the Court noted that the municipal franchise agreement “describes the cost-sharing mechanism in clear language and it unambiguously applies when a municipality requests relocation of a gas system to accommodate any municipal works.”

While it’s unlikely that the specific facts of the Union Gas Limited v Norwich (Township) case will arise frequently, the discussion about the effect of the municipal franchise agreement is instructive. As the Court acknowledged, the intent of the cost sharing provision mechanism of the municipal franchise agreement is to act as a disincentive to municipalities to require gas pipeline relocations. This case confirms the expectation that a municipality will be responsible for some of the associated costs, even in a situation where a statute appears to require otherwise. 

Areas of Expertise

Related Blogs

Posted in: Practice & Procedure | Ontario

Insights EnergyInsider
OEB Enacts Amendments to Regulatory Codes to Address Cyber Security By David Stevens Mar 21, 2018 On March 15, 2018, the Ontario Energy Board issued Notice of Amendments to the Transmission System Code and Distribution System Code to implement cybersecurity policy objectives that were set out in the OEB Staff’s June 2017 Report on a Cyber Security Framework. The amendments require transmitter...

Posted in: Ontario | Energy Policy | Climate Change / Renewables

Insights EnergyInsider
All Current Allowances Sold Out in Ontario’s First Joint Cap and Trade Auction By David Stevens Mar 06, 2018 On February 28, 2018, the Summary Results Report from the first joint cap and trade auction involving Ontario, Quebec and California was released. The report shows that all current vintage allowances from each of the three jurisdictions were sold in the February 21, 2018 auction. Additionally, ar...

Posted in: Ontario | Consumer Protection

Insights EnergyInsider
Ontario Implements New Restrictions on Door-to-Door Transactions, but Delays Some New Requirements to May 1st By David Stevens Mar 05, 2018 As described in recent posts, Ontario has implemented new provisions of the Ontario Consumer Protection Act that will prohibit a range of door-to door consumer transactions. The new rules, which came into effect on March 1, 2018, make unsolicited “direct agreements” unenforceable for HVAC equipme...