Tuesday, October 5, 2010

SCC Case Information 33203 Summary Vernon Joseph Smith v. Alliance Pipeline Ltd.

Scheduled  Hearing 2010-10-05


SCC Case Information


Summary

33203

Vernon Joseph Smith v. Alliance Pipeline Ltd.

(Federal Court) (Civil) (By Leave)







Keywords

Administrative Law.



Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch) for information purposes only.



Administrative law - Boards and tribunals - Standard of review - Arbitration - Civil procedure - Costs - Federal Court of Appeal determining that the Appellant was not entitled to compensation for the unrecovered portion of his legal costs incurred in defending the injunctive action and was not entitled to be compensated for the costs of the arbitration proceedings commenced before the first panel - Cost orders in the context of energy-related projects such as pipelines that adversely and directly affect farmland - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in straying from the proper role of a secondary level of appellate review when it failed to limit its decision to an assessment of the Federal Court`s selection and application of the correct standard of review - Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in applying the standard of correctness in analyzing the second Pipeline Arbitration Committee’s interpretation of Part V of the National Energy Board Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-7.



In 1999, the Respondent, Alliance, constructed a pipeline across a portion of Mr. Smith’s farmland located in Alberta. Despite a series of agreements between the parties with respect to the construction of the pipeline, a dispute arose regarding the reclamation of a portion of the land used for the pipeline. Mr. Smith began the reclamation work and sought compensation. The matter proceeded to arbitration. The first arbitration committee lost its quorum. Mr. Smith was largely successful in the second arbitration. Alliance appealed under s. 101 of the National Energy Board Act, claiming that the second panel had exceeded its jurisdiction and that it had erred in law by awarding Mr. Smith his costs incurred in the Alberta Queen’s Bench litigation and in those proceedings commenced before the first panel. The appeal was dismissed. The appeal was allowed by the Federal Court of Appeal.