Back to all blog posts

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

Jul 3, 2020

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against Approval of Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project

By David Stevens and Benjamin Mayer-Goodman

On July 2, 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) dismissed an application for leave to appeal from a group of First Nations in British Columbia who sought to challenge the federal Cabinet’s second approval of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project.

By dismissing the appeal, the SCC effectively upheld the Federal Court of Appeal’s (FCA) decision in Coldwater First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General) (Coldwater), released on February 4, 2020. In Coldwater, the FCA dismissed judicial review applications from a group of First Nations, which challenged the adequacy of the federal government’s Indigenous consultation process. We detailed this ruling in a previous article.

After numerous court challenges, the SCC’s dismissal of the current leave application may be the end of the road for legal challenges to the approval of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project. However, one news report indicates that First Nations’ leadership will be turning their attention to other potential legal options.

In August 2018, the FCA overturned Cabinet’s initial approval of the pipeline in Tsleil-Waututh Nation et al. v. Attorney General of Canada et al. (Tsleil-Waututh Nation). We detailed the case in a previous article.

After Tsleil-Waututh Nation, the federal government re-consulted with potentially-affected Indigenous peoples and also requested that the National Energy Board (NEB) perform a more exhaustive analysis on project-related marine shipping matters.

On June 18, 2019, Cabinet approved the Trans Mountain Expansion Project. The Canadian Energy Regulator (successor to the NEB) issued project approvals shortly after.

Twelve different parties filed applications for judicial review of the June 2019 Cabinet approval to the FCA in a second attempt to quash the project. On September 4, 2019, Stratas J.A., in the FCA decision Raincoast Conservation Foundation v. Canada (Attorney General) (Raincoast), granted leave for six of those applications to proceed to judicial review. We detailed this decision in a previous article.

Five parties who were denied permission to proceed to judicial review appealed the FCA ruling. On March 5, 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada declined to grant leave to appeal to those parties.

In Coldwater, the FCA reviewed claims from the six parties granted leave to proceed to judicial review. The FCA stipulated that the judicial review would be limited to the Crown’s duty to consult with Indigenous peoples and whether this round of consultation was adequate. According to the Court’s summary statement, the FCA judged Cabinet’s decision to approve the pipeline using a “reasonableness” standard of review. The Court found that Cabinet’s determination was “reasonable” based on “the evidence in the record, the law concerning the duty to consult, the legislation governing project approvals and the justification offered by Cabinet for its conclusion.”

Now that the SCC has essentially upheld the Coldwater decision, it does not appear that opponents of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project have any further legal recourse to overturn the federal Cabinet’s decision. However, objections to aspects of the project may be raised in the course of the Canadian Energy Regulator’s review of the detailed project route.

Areas of Expertise

Related Blogs

Federal Court of Appeal Dismisses Challenges to Cabinet Approval of Trans Mountain Expansion Project By David Stevens Feb 10, 2020 On February 4, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) released its decision in Coldwater First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General), dismissing judicial review applications challenging the federal Cabinet’s approval of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project.

Posted in: British Columbia | Facilities | Practice & Procedure

Insights EnergyInsider
Supreme Court of Canada Confirms B.C. Cannot Stop Trans Mountain Expansion By David Stevens Jan 17, 2020 On January 16, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed an appeal from the Government of British Columbia that sought to confirm that BC 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 appe...

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 | Ontario | Energy Policy

Insights EnergyInsider
Ontario Directs NextBridge to Construct the East-West Tie Transmission Line By David Stevens Feb 01, 2019 On January 30, 2019, the Ontario Minister of Energy issued an Order in Council and Directive to the Ontario Energy Board (OEB), mandating that the East-West Tie Line Project will be constructed by NextBridge Infrastructure LP (NextBridge). The Directive indicates that NextBridge’s ...

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.