The Supreme Court of Canada judges took only one month to decide whether to hear the appeal or not. In Ernst vs AER, they took three months even though her case is much less complicated than Redwater.
Supreme Court of Canada pro-industry bias yelling loud and clear? The Supreme Court never posted one citizen letter in support of Ernst’s case (there were a minimum of 5 mailed to the court), yet the court posts Canada’s oil and gas lobby group, CAPP, supporting the AER’s application!
From the court’s docket: 2017-08-28 Correspondence received, From the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP). Re: Supports the application and will file a motion to intervene if granted
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
Redwater Energy Corporation is a bankrupt company that held licences in oil and gas properties. Those properties included orphan wells that are at the end of their lives and are non-producing. The cost of remediation for disclaimed wells can exceed their value. The company’s receiver and subsequently its trustee in bankruptcy sought to disclaim the bankrupt’s interest in those wells but to sell the valuable assets.
The Alberta Energy Regulator has specific end-of-life rules on how a spent well must be rendered environmentally safe. Disclaimed wells become the responsibility of the Regulator and the Orphan Well Association. In this case, the Regulator opposed the trustee’s disclaimer on the basis that the trustee had to comply with the end-of-life obligations prior to any distribution to the creditors. The Regulator issued abandonment and remediation orders in respect of the wells that had been disclaimed. The trustee did not comply with the orders.
The Regulator and the Association applied to the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta, seeking compliance with the remediation orders. The trustee brought a cross-application for approval of the sale of some assets, and a ruling on the constitutionality of the Regulator’s position.
[Refer also to:
Birds more important than workers & fracked families: What game is AER playing at this time? Trying to impress the SCC that AER is not a worker & wildlife killing, pollution enabler? Because ruling in AER’s Leave to Appeal Redwater awaits? Syncrude charged in deaths of 31 great blue herons at tarsands mine; *If* convicted, faces maximum penalty of $500,000
Complaint against the lying AER & Alberta govt by Stewart Shields. Comment by Diana Daunheimer: “Grant Thorton LLP triple dipping, with the help of the AER?” AER vs Redwater: AER seeks leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada
AER’s $300 Billion Ponzi Scheme Closer to Fruition? Alberta Court of Appeal favours creditors over the environment, upholds Redwater decision. Did AER set this up to create horrific legal precedent to let companies hang their toxic pollution and massive damages on the public via the impotent Orphan Well Program?
AER Redwater Appeal: Will the courts protect the rich, make ordinary Canadians pay for industry’s abandoned oilfield messes? Alberta Court of Appeal to decide who will pay for Redwater’s abandoned wells after bankruptcy (using the law to intentionally avoid responsibility after years of profit-taking?)
Is AER vs Redwater worsening cleanup of abandoned oil and gas wells in Alberta, BC and Sasktchewan? Did AER file the lawsuit intentionally to set legal precedent and dump clean up costs on taxpayers to enhance profits for oil and gas companies?
More Propaganda CAPP style? AER, Charter Violating, No Duty of Care, Legally Immune, Abuser of Power, Pollution & Law Violator Enabler, “warns” industry it “could” go after directors, executives to clean up the current $300 Billion in oilfield liabilities. Really? With Ex-Encana Exec/Ex-Cenovus Exec/Ex-CAPP Exec Gerard Protti as AER Chair?
“Where does the buck stop?” AER to appeal ruling on oil, gas cleanup obligations. Chief Justice Wittmann found Alberta’s oil and gas licencing regime to be unconstitutional relating to money, but not in Ernst’s “valid” constitutional claim against AER relating to drinking water contamination by oil and gas