<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Air pollution class action against the tar sands?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://envirolaw.com/class-action-tar-sands/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://envirolaw.com/class-action-tar-sands/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=class-action-tar-sands</link>
	<description>News and analysis (not advice) by a top Ontario environmental lawyer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 00:34:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Luttes autochtones internationales de Juillet 2010 &#171; KKKanada</title>
		<link>http://envirolaw.com/class-action-tar-sands/comment-page-1/#comment-1762</link>
		<dc:creator>Luttes autochtones internationales de Juillet 2010 &#171; KKKanada</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:31:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://envirolaw.com/?p=3188#comment-1762</guid>
		<description>[...] cruciale avait été ouverte par la Cour Supérieure d’Ontario, qui donne la possibilité d’un recours collectif contre les sables bitumineux. Le 6 juillet, la Cour remit son jugement sur l’affaire Smith contre Inco Limited; la toute [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] cruciale avait été ouverte par la Cour Supérieure d’Ontario, qui donne la possibilité d’un recours collectif contre les sables bitumineux. Le 6 juillet, la Cour remit son jugement sur l’affaire Smith contre Inco Limited; la toute [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Underreported Struggles #40, July 2010 &#124; Intercontinental Cry</title>
		<link>http://envirolaw.com/class-action-tar-sands/comment-page-1/#comment-1629</link>
		<dc:creator>Underreported Struggles #40, July 2010 &#124; Intercontinental Cry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 22:42:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://envirolaw.com/?p=3188#comment-1629</guid>
		<description>[...] a vital door was opened by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice that gives way for a possible class action lawsuit against the tar sands. On July 6, the Court handed down its decision on Smith v. Inco Ltd., the very first court decision [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a vital door was opened by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice that gives way for a possible class action lawsuit against the tar sands. On July 6, the Court handed down its decision on Smith v. Inco Ltd., the very first court decision [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tweets that mention Air pollution class action against the tar sands? -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://envirolaw.com/class-action-tar-sands/comment-page-1/#comment-1592</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention Air pollution class action against the tar sands? -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:09:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://envirolaw.com/?p=3188#comment-1592</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by West Coast Env. Law, LawyerNexus. LawyerNexus said: Air pollution class action against the tar sands?: The successful class action by Port Colborne residents, Smit.. http://bit.ly/aMf5Bb [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by West Coast Env. Law, LawyerNexus. LawyerNexus said: Air pollution class action against the tar sands?: The successful class action by Port Colborne residents, Smit.. <a href="http://bit.ly/aMf5Bb" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/aMf5Bb</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Driedzic</title>
		<link>http://envirolaw.com/class-action-tar-sands/comment-page-1/#comment-1590</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Driedzic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 16:05:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://envirolaw.com/?p=3188#comment-1590</guid>
		<description>Fascinating, thanks.  I had been wondering how the private law might serve a broader environmental protection purpose when heath claims continue to be frustrated by causation issues. 
 
If a class action based on property damage was to be certified against the oil sands, it could trigger public participation in the permitting of future facilities.  Currently the Alberta regulatory boards only provide intervenor standing to the &quot;directly affected&quot;.  This narrow test often requires proving a &quot;potential&quot; effect on property rights.  A certified class action could provide evidence of potential effects.  That the Inco case recognized airborne effects is crucial because the oil sands are on public lands far from population centers. 
 </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fascinating, thanks.  I had been wondering how the private law might serve a broader environmental protection purpose when heath claims continue to be frustrated by causation issues. </p>
<p>If a class action based on property damage was to be certified against the oil sands, it could trigger public participation in the permitting of future facilities.  Currently the Alberta regulatory boards only provide intervenor standing to the &quot;directly affected&quot;.  This narrow test often requires proving a &quot;potential&quot; effect on property rights.  A certified class action could provide evidence of potential effects.  That the Inco case recognized airborne effects is crucial because the oil sands are on public lands far from population centers. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced

Served from: envirolaw.com @ 2012-05-21 07:34:52 -->
