Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 19 DECEMBER 2013

Judicial Scrutiny Of Alberta Environment And Sustainable Resource Development Policy On Objections To Oilsands Projects

In the recent Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench decision Pembina Institute v. Alberta (Environment and Sustainable Resource Development), Justice Marceau held that the Director of the department of Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development ("AESRD") violated principles of natural justice when rejecting the standing of the Oilsands Environmental Coalition and/or its members (collectively "OSEC") to file a Statement of Concern with AESRD.

CanadaEnvironment

In the recent Alberta Court of Queen's Bench decision Pembina Institute v. Alberta (Environment and Sustainable Resource Development), Justice Marceau held that the Director of the department of Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development ("AESRD") violated principles of natural justice when rejecting the standing of the Oilsands Environmental Coalition and/or its members (collectively "OSEC") to file a Statement of Concern with AESRD. By way of background, OSEC had attempted to file a Statement of Concern relating to an application for approval of a steam assisted gravity drainage oilsand project proposed next to the Fort MacKay River, in the Fort McMurray area. Filing a Statement of Concern with AESRD, if accepted, not only enables the concern filer to participate in the process relating to the application in question, but is a requirement for standing before the Environmental Appeals Board ("EAB") in any later appeal of the Director's decision. If the

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from