Canadian Environmental Law Jurisprudence 2
|
See more in Philosophy
Canadian Environmental Law Jurisprudence 2
Topics of this game:
- In Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), 2004 SCC 73, is concerned about when the duty to consult arises and whether it arose in this case where there was provincial forestry operations proposed on land where Haida title was asserted. The Supreme Court of Canada found that there was a duty to consult when the Crown has ________ knowledge that may adversely affect _________.
- Friends of the Oldman River Society v. Canada (Minister of Transport), [1992] 1 SCR 3 affirmed that the constitution should be so interpreted as to afford ____________ ample means to protect the environment while maintaining the general structure of the Constitution. This is because "environmental control" as a matter does not meet the test for national concern under the Peace, Order, and Good Government power of the federal government.
- MiningWatch Canada v. Canada (Fisheries and Oceans), 2010 SCC 2 was about whether the scope of the environmental assessment of a gold and copper open pit mining and milling project in BC, was appropriate and adequate under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). The Supreme Court of Canada found that the appropriate scope under CEAA is __________, to determine what level of assessment is required.
- Canada (Fisheries and Oceans) v. David Suzuki Foundation, 2012 FCA 40 is about the interpretation of s.58 of of the Species at Risk Act. The Court highlighted that the parliamentary intent behind s.58 was to provide legal protection of critical habitat of listed endangered or threatened species that is __________.
- Clyde River (Hamlet) v. Petroleum Geo‑Services Inc., 2017 SCC 40 was about the duty to consult and what party must fulfill the duty to consult. The Inuit of Clyde River were concerned about the impacts of seismic testing off the shores of Nunavut, on their treaty rights. They allege that the duty to consult was not fulfilled but the Crown alleges that the National Energy Board (NEB), fulfilled the duty on their behalf. The SCC found the NEB's consultation ___ for fulfilling duty.
- Chippewas of the Thames First Nation v. Enbridge Pipelines Inc., 2017 SCC 41 was about the content of the duty to consult when the duty is discharged by a regulatory body, in this case, the National Energy Board. The court found that the duty to consult was discharged by the NEB because ____________.
- Quebec (Attorney General) v. Moses, 2010 SCC 17 is about the role of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, a modern treaty under s.35 of the Constitution, in the assessment of a proposed mine. The proposed mine would impact fish habitat and the issue was whether the fisheries interest is the responsibility of the federal Fisheries Minister or the provincial treaty bodies. The Court found that the responsibility ultimately lies with _____________ & the Agreement procedure does _____.
- St. Lawrence Cement Inc. v. Barrette, 2008 SCC 64 was about the nature of the civil damages that resulted from the odour, dust, noise, and other effects of a cement plant in a municipality. The question was whether the liability was based on wrongful conduct or whether it arose of no fault of St. Lawrence Cement (SLC). The SCC found that the civil liability was of no fault because SLC caused abnormal annoyance ________________________________.
- British Columbia v. Canadian Forest Products Ltd., 2004 SCC 38 was about the damages for a forest fire in interior BC that was caused largely by Canadian Forest Products (Canfor). The Crown sought damages for three things: (1) fire suppression & restoration costs; (2) loss of revenue from harvestable trees; (3) loss of non-harvestable trees. The SCC restored the trial judges ruling which only awarded damages for (1) because _____ did not lead to Crown losses under (2) and (3).
- Mikisew Cree v Canada, 2005 SCC 69 was about whether a modern treaty provision replaced the Crown's duty to consult with regards to building a winter road which may impact Aboriginal rights to hunt and trap. The Crown was found to have breached a duty to consult because the duty to consult flows from the Honour of the Crown, not a treaty. The SCC said that the controlling question in all cases is: With respect to the interests at stake, what will maintain the honour of the Crown and ____ .
