Standing Buffalo Dakota First Nation v. Enbridge Pipelines Inc., 2009 FCA 308

The appellants raise the novel question of whether, before making its decisions in relation to those applications, the NEB was required to determine whether by virtue of the decision in Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), 2004 SCC 73 (CanLII), [2004] 3 S.C.R. 511, 2004 SCC 73, the Crown, which was not a party to those applications or a participant in the hearings, was under a duty to consult the appellants with respect to potential adverse impacts of the proposed projects on the appellants and if it was, whether that duty had been adequately discharged.

DISPOSITION

[50] For the foregoing reasons, I would dismiss each of the appeals, with costs to the respondent Enbridge Pipelines Inc. in Court files A-537-08 and A-475-08, the respondent Enbridge Southern Lights GP Inc. in Court file A-541-08 and the respondent TransCanada Keystone Pipeline GP Ltd. in A-542-08.

Tags: Standing Buffalo  First Nations  environment  Canada