order

Buyer can’t void purchase of contaminated land

Crosslink Bridge Corp. (Crosslink) purchased contaminated land from CN Railway (CN) in 2008 to develop a tourism, entertainment, retail and sports venue in the Niagara region. Crosslink received a box of environmental reports, including the Certificate of Requirement (also registered on title) that revealed the existence of a Ministry of the Environment Director’s order relating…

Perverse Abitibi test produces perverse results in Nortel, Northstar appeals

The Ontario Court of Appeal has released its decisions in the Ministry of the Environment’s appeals from Justice Geoffrey Morawetz in Re Nortel and Re Northstar. In both cases, Justice Morawetz rejected MOE attempts to claim priority over secured creditors by ordering insolvent companies to cleanup historic contamination. In both cases, Justice Morawetz decided that the…

Why the Supreme Court decision in AbitibiBowater won’t work

We have written several times about the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in AbitibiBowater v. Newfoundland, in which insolvency law trumped environmental orders. Today, we want to tell you more about the rule the court laid down, and why it is likely to have perverse consequences. In short, the Supreme Court ruled that environmental orders can…

Jail for victim of vandalism?

1197338 Ontario Inc. was fined $150,000 plus the 25% Victim Fine Surcharge for failing to comply with a Director’s Order to clean up a spill of PCBs; its president, Lawrence Brander was sentenced to 30 days in jail for the same offence.  But why did the spill occur?

Environmental appeals have to be done right

The Environmental Review Tribunal has reminded all potential appellants that they MUST correctly file their appeals, if they want their case to be heard. In Waterdown Gardens v MOE, a prolonged dispute between the Ministry and the company resulted in two separate orders suspending their certificate of approval. The company appealed the first suspension. During…

A rare jail sentence

Jail is a possible penalty for many environmental offences (see s. 187 of the Environmental Protection Act), but is rarely imposed. It is usually reserved for those defiantly causing serious pollution. On September 1, 2010, Pierre Sleiman was sentenced to 90 days in jail and fined $5,000 plus the 25% victim fine surcharge. In 2007,…