#supreme-court-of-canada

In a significant victory for federal environmental policy, the Federal Court of Appeal has reinstated the government's ban on single-use plastics. The ruling overturns a 2023 Federal Court decision that deemed the ban unconstitutional and too broad. The appeal court found the government acted within its authority by listing plastic manufactured items as 'toxic' under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. This decision restores regulations targeting items like checkout bags and cutlery, though the legal battle may continue if the plastics industry coalition seeks an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Federal Court of Appeal has reinstated the Canadian government's ban on certain single-use plastics, overturning a lower court ruling that struck it down in 2023. The decision is a major victory for the federal Liberals' environmental agenda, reaffirming their authority to regulate plastic pollution under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). The court found the government's classification of plastic items as "toxic" for regulatory purposes was reasonable. While environmental groups celebrated the news, the plastics industry coalition that launched the initial challenge is considering an appeal to the Supreme Court.

The Federal Court of Appeal has reinstated the Canadian government's ban on certain single-use plastics, overturning a 2023 Federal Court ruling that deemed it unconstitutional. The decision restores the government's authority to prohibit items like plastic bags, straws, and cutlery by listing them as toxic under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). This ruling marks a significant victory for the federal government's environmental agenda but is a major setback for plastics manufacturers who challenged the ban. The legal battle may continue, as the industry coalition could seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The federal government has introduced legislation to amend the Impact Assessment Act following a landmark Supreme Court of Canada ruling that found the law to be largely unconstitutional. The court determined the 2019 law, known as Bill C-69, improperly intruded on provincial jurisdiction over resource projects. The proposed changes aim to narrow the scope of federal reviews, focusing specifically on areas of federal authority like fisheries and Indigenous rights, rather than a project's overall public interest. This move seeks to provide clarity for industry while addressing the constitutional concerns raised by the court and several provinces.

The federal government has tabled new legislation to amend the Impact Assessment Act, following a Supreme Court of Canada advisory opinion that deemed major parts of the original law unconstitutional. The proposed changes aim to narrow the scope of federal environmental reviews to matters strictly within federal jurisdiction, addressing the Court's concerns about overreach into provincial powers over natural resource projects. The move seeks to provide greater clarity for industry and quell intergovernmental friction, particularly with resource-rich provinces like Alberta, while maintaining federal oversight on key environmental and Indigenous concerns.

The federal government has introduced new legislation to overhaul Canada's environmental assessment process for major projects. The proposed law aims to replace the Impact Assessment Act, which the Supreme Court of Canada found to be largely unconstitutional due to federal overreach into provincial jurisdiction. Tabled by the Environment and Natural Resources ministers, the bill seeks to create a more efficient and constitutionally sound framework. It focuses federal oversight on specific areas like fisheries and Indigenous rights, aiming to balance environmental protection with the need for clarity and investment certainty in the natural resource sector.

The Supreme Court of Canada has delivered a landmark ruling, finding key provisions of the federal Impact Assessment Act unconstitutional. In a 5-2 decision, the court concluded that the law, which assesses major energy and infrastructure projects, oversteps federal authority and infringes on provincial jurisdiction over natural resources. The ruling is a significant victory for Alberta and other provinces that challenged the legislation, often dubbed the "no-pipelines law." The federal government must now rewrite its environmental assessment framework, creating uncertainty for future resource development across Canada.

The federal government has introduced new legislation to overhaul Canada's environmental assessment process for major projects. The proposed law aims to replace the Impact Assessment Act, which the Supreme Court of Canada found to be largely unconstitutional in a 2023 advisory opinion. The new bill seeks to create a more streamlined and constitutionally sound framework by narrowing the scope of federal reviews to areas of clear federal jurisdiction. It represents Ottawa's attempt to balance environmental protection with economic development while addressing provincial concerns about federal overreach into resource management.

The federal government has introduced new legislation to amend the Impact Assessment Act (IAA), responding directly to a Supreme Court of Canada ruling that found the original law largely unconstitutional. The proposed changes aim to narrow the scope of federal environmental reviews, focusing more explicitly on areas of federal jurisdiction to avoid intruding on provincial powers. Tabled by Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault and Energy Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, the bill seeks to provide greater clarity for major resource projects, but it is already facing scrutiny from provinces, industry, and environmental groups over where the new lines are drawn.

The Canadian federal government has introduced new legislation to overhaul its environmental assessment process for major projects, directly responding to a Supreme Court of Canada ruling that found the previous Impact Assessment Act (IAA) largely unconstitutional. The proposed law aims to narrow the scope of federal oversight, focusing on effects within clear federal jurisdiction such as fisheries, migratory birds, and Indigenous rights. The move seeks to provide greater regulatory certainty for industries like mining and energy while navigating the complex constitutional division of powers between Ottawa and the provinces, which had challenged the original act.