Court Challenges to Canada Energy Regulator or Governor in Council Decisions
The CER operates within a system of checks and balances. Our decisions are subject to independent and impartial judicial oversight, generally through the Federal Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Canada, and the CER is bound to act in accordance with the court’s decisions.
As part of our commitment to transparency, we share information about challenges to the CER’s decisions and recommendations to the Governor in Council in the database below. Challenges to previous National Energy Board decisions and recommendations are also included. The purpose is to provide Canadians with up-to-date information about the status of these legal challenges, regardless of the outcome.
The following information includes the status of litigation, appeals, and judicial reviews related to the CER or Governor in Council decisions. Where possible, the database provides a link to an external third-party controlled website, such as the Court database or an online version of the decision. It does not include civil claims or judicial reviews of administrative decisions. The database is searchable by project name, parties or filing date.
Court Challenges
Project Name |
Description of Challenge |
Parties |
Court Filing Date |
Court and Docket Number |
Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Manitoba-Minnesota Transmission Project (EH-001-2017) |
Appeal of the Federal Court’s 24 September 2021 Decision |
Roseau River Anishinabe First Nation v. Attorney General of Canada, Canadian Energy Regulator and Manitoba Hydro |
2021-10-25 |
Federal Court of Appeal |
The Applicant applied to appeal the Federal Court’s 24 September 2021 Decision. Issues raised include the standard for consultation and the duty to consult. |
Manitoba-Minnesota Transmission Project (EH-001-2017) |
Appeal of the Federal Court’s 24 September 2021 Decision |
Long Plain First Nation v. Attorney General of Canada, Canadian Energy Regulator and Manitoba Hydro |
2021-10-25 |
Federal Court of Appeal |
The Applicant applied to appeal the Federal Court’s 24 September 2021 Decision. Issues raised include the standard for consultation and the duty to consult. |
Manitoba-Minnesota Transmission Project (EH-001-2017) |
Appeal of the Federal Court’s 24 September 2021 Decision |
Chief Jim Major et al. v. Attorney General of Canada and Manitoba Hydro |
2021-10-22 |
Federal Court of Appeal |
The Applicant applied to appeal the Federal Court’s 24 September 2021 Decision. Issues raised include the standard for consultation and the duty to consult. |
Kingston Midstream Westspur Limited |
Notice of Motion for Leave to Appeal the Commission’s Order MO-020-2021 |
Kingston Midstream Westpur Limited v. Secure Energy Services Inc. and Canada Energy Regulator |
2021-08-04 |
Federal Court of Appeal |
The Applicant applied for leave to appeal the Commission’s Order. Issues raised include jurisdiction, procedural fairness, and interpretation of the common carriage principle. The applicant filed a Notice of Discontinuance on 29 September 2022. |
Kingston Midstream Westspur Limited (RH-003-2020) |
Notice of Motion for Leave to Appeal the Commission’s Order MO-020-2021 |
Kingston Marketing Limited v. the Canada Energy Regulator and Secure Energy Services Inc. |
2021-08-05 |
Federal Court of Appeal |
The Applicant applied for leave to appeal the Commission’s Order. Issues raised include jurisdiction, contractual rights and proprietary interests. The applicant filed a Notice of Discontinuance on 29 September 2022. |
Kingston Midstream Westspur Limited (RH-003-2020) |
Judicial Review of the Commission’s Order MO-020-2021 |
Kingston Marketing Limited v. the Attorney General, the Canada Energy Regulator and Secure Energy Services Inc |
2021-08-06 |
Federal Court of Appeal |
The Applicant applied for leave to appeal the Commission’s Order. Issues raised include jurisdiction, contractual rights and proprietary interests. The applicant filed a Notice of Discontinuance on 29 September 2022. |
Manitoba-Minnesota Transmission Project (EH-001-2017) |
Application to Appeal CER Decision [Filing C07776] regarding Conditions 3 and 15 of Certificate EC-59. |
Manitoba Métis Federation Inc. v. The Canada Energy Regulator and the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board |
2021-01-15 |
Federal Court of Appeal |
The Applicant is seeking to appeal the CER’s 11 August 2020 decision regarding Conditions 3 and 15 of Certificate EC-59. Issues raised include concerns about the interpretation of Condition 3, honour of the Crown and not holding a public hearing before making the decision. On 6 February 2023, the FCA dismissed the appeal. See 2023 FCA 24. |
TCPL Mainline operations and maintenance activity |
Statement of Claim |
Aroland First Nation and Ginoogaming First Nation v. National Energy Board, TransCanada PipeLines Limited and Attorney General of Canada |
2017-01-05 |
Ontario Court of Justice |
The applicants seek, among other things, injunctive and declaratory relief and damages for alleged breach of constitutional obligations to consult and accommodate related to TCPL’s plans to conduct integrity digs and other work in NW Ontario. The Ontario Superior Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ partial summary judgment motion on 30 July 2018. The Court concluded that the motion cannot be fairly and justly decided using the summary judgment process and would require a full trial. |
Court Challenges to Canada Energy Regulator or Governor in Council Decisions Archive
- Date modified: