Search results
Order by most recent / most popular / relevance
Results: 1-3 of 3
The environmental assessment track discretion to scope is not discretion to track?
- Miller Thomson LLP
- -
- Canada
- -
- February 3 2010
In Mining Watch Canada v. Canada (Fisheries and Oceans), 2010 SCC 2, Red Chris Development Company and BCMetals Corporation (“Red Chris”) sought to develop a copper and gold open pit mining and milling operation in north-western British Columbia
Case comment - Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. v. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council
- Miller Thomson LLP
- -
- Canada
- -
- November 3 2010
On Thursday, October 28, 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. v. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, overturning the British Columbia Court of Appeal and confirming the decision of the British Columbia Utilities Commission (the “Commission”) approving the 2007 Energy Purchase Agreement entered into by Alcan and BC Hydro (the “2007 EPA”
Upper Nicola Indian Band v. British Columbia (Environment)
- Miller Thomson LLP
- -
- Canada
- -
- June 16 2011
In the recent case of Upper Nicola Indian Band v. British Columbia (Environment), 2011 BCSC 388, the British Columbia Supreme Court considered the scope of the Crown’s duty of consultation with aboriginal people in light of the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. v. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, 2010 SCC 43, and, not surprisingly, held that the Supreme Court of Canada's interpretation of the duty as being confined to adverse impacts flowing from the specific Crown proposal at issue - and not to larger adverse impacts of the project of which it is a part - applies beyond the unique circumstances of that case
