We have been advised that fraudulent emails and faxes regarding unclaimed insurance money have been received by members of the public from a source claiming to be Aird & Berlis LLP. These communications are not from Aird & Berlis LLP. Disregard them and do not engage with the sender in any way. Please report the attempted fraud by contacting the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre.

Back to all blog posts

Posted in: British Columbia | Facilities | Practice & Procedure

Jan 17, 2020

Supreme Court of Canada Confirms B.C. Cannot Stop Trans Mountain Expansion

By David Stevens

On January 16, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) dismissed an appeal from the Government of British Columbia (B.C.) that sought to confirm that B.C. has jurisdiction to regulate the shipment of “heavy oil” through the province. In a unanimous judgment issued from the bench the same day as the appeal was heard, the SCC confirmed the reasons for decision of the B.C. Court of Appeal that had previously denied the B.C. government’s case. No separate reasons will be provided by the SCC.

As discussed in an earlier post, in 2018 the B.C. government submitted a reference to the B.C. Court of Appeal, asking to confirm whether proposed amendments to the Environmental Management Act (EMA) were intra vires. At the centre of the reference is proposed Part 2.1 of the EMA. The purpose of the proposed amendment is “the protection of the environment, the health and well-being of British Columbians and their communities from the adverse effects of hazardous substances, and the implementation of the ‘polluter pays’ principle.” The effect of the proposed amendment is to regulate the shipment of “most forms of heavy crude oil and all bitumen and blended bitumen products” and require permits for shippers whose volumes increase beyond prior levels. The specific aim of the amendment is to stop the planned Trans Mountain pipeline expansion (TMX).

The B.C. government’s reference asked the Court of Appeal three questions regarding the proposed amendment:

  1. Does British Columbia have jurisdiction to “substantially” enact the proposed amendment?
  2. If so, would the proposed amendment “be applicable to hazardous substances brought into British Columbia by means of interprovincial undertakings?”
  3. If so, is some or all of the proposed amendment inoperative because of existing federal law?

As we detailed in an earlier post, in its reasons for decision, the unanimous five member panel of the Court of Appeal answered “no” to the first question and did not consider the remaining two questions.

The Court found that while “both levels of government have jurisdiction over aspects of the environment,” the proposed amendments are ultra vires because they apply directly to an interprovincial undertaking and have the potential to “stop [the TMX project] in its tracks.” Furthermore, the Court found that the effect of proposed Part 2.1 of the EMA is “to usurp the role of the NEB.” Accordingly, the Court concluded that jurisdiction over the pipeline properly belongs to federal jurisdiction. For more discussion of the B.C. Court of Appeal decision, see here

Areas of Expertise

Related Blogs

Posted in: Canada (Federal) | Practice & Procedure | Facilities

Insights EnergyInsider
The Federal Court of Appeal Grants Leave to Six Judicial Review Applications That Seek to Quash the Reapproval of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project By David Stevens and Codie Mitchell Sep 11, 2019 The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project is once again in the hands of the Federal Court of Appeal after the September 4, 2019 decision in Raincoast Conservation Foundation v. Canada (Attorney General).

Posted in: Practice & Procedure | Facilities | Canada (Federal)

Insights EnergyInsider
Federal Court of Appeal Quashes Cabinet Approval of Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion By David Stevens and Matthew Helfand Sep 05, 2018 On August 30, 2018, the Federal Court of Appeal released its decision in the matter of Tsleil-Waututh Nation et al. v. Attorney General of Canada et al. In this decision, the court has quashed Cabinet’s approval of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project.

Posted in: Canada (Federal) | British Columbia

Insights EnergyInsider
Supreme Court of British Columbia Dismisses Challenges to Trans Mountain Pipeline Environmental Assessment By Stan Fedun Jun 05, 2018 On May 24, 2018, the Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed challenges to the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project by the City of Vancouver and the Squamish Nation.​ Both parties petitioned the Court to set aside the Environmental Assessment...

Posted in: Canada (Federal) | British Columbia | Alberta

Insights EnergyInsider
Government of Canada Purchases Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project for $4.5 Billion By Stan Fedun May 31, 2018 On May 29, 2018, the Government of Canada announced a $4.5 billion deal with Kinder Morgan to purchase the Trans Mountain pipeline and related terminal assets “in order to secure the timely completion” of the project.

Posted in: Canada (Federal) | Energy Policy | Facilities | British Columbia

Insights EnergyInsider
Federal Government to Intervene in B.C.’s TransMountain Reference Case By David Stevens May 04, 2018 On May 3, 2018, the federal Minister of Justice Jody Wilson-Raybould announced that the federal government will intervene in the British Columbia government’s reference question to the B.C. Court of Appeal. The Justice Minister indicated that “[w]e are confident in Parliament’s jurisdic...