ATCO Gas & Pipelines Ltd. v. Alberta (Energy & Utilities Board)

ATCO Gas & Pipelines Ltd. v. Alberta (Energy & Utilities Board)

Majority (Bastarache, LeBel, Deschamps, Charron JJ.): On correctness review the Board lacked jurisdiction—neither the express statutory text nor the doctrine of jurisdiction by necessary implication authorizes the Board to allocate proceeds of a utility’s asset sale to ratepayers; the Board’s plenary power to impose conditions in the public interest must be read in context of the rate-setting regulatory scheme and cannot be used to appropriate private property; additionally, the Board’s exercise of discretion in this case was unreasonable because it had explicitly found no harm to customers and identified no public interest justification.

Citation
2006 SCC 4
Parties
Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal: City of Calgary; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd.; Intervener: Alberta Energy and Utilities Board; Intervener: Ontario Energy Board; Intervener: Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc.; Intervener: Union Gas Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Appeal Concerning Judicial Review of Regulator’s Decision / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Alberta Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction by Necessary Implication, Standard of Review, Rate Setting, Allocation of Proceeds of Sale, Public Interest, Regulatory Compact, Retroactive Ratemaking
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Energy Regulation Utilities Regulation Property Law Jurisdiction by Necessary Implication Standard of Review Rate Setting Allocation of Proceeds of Sale +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

City of Calgary

Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal

ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd.

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Alberta Energy and Utilities Board

Intervener

Ontario Energy Board

Intervener

Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc.

Intervener

Union Gas Limited

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Administrative Law Appeal Concerning Judicial Review of Regulator’s Decision / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Alberta Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board had explicit or implicit jurisdiction to allocate proceeds from the sale of a utility’s assets to ratepayers
  2. 2 What standard of review applies to the Board’s determination of its jurisdiction and to its exercise of discretion
  3. 3 Whether the Board’s allocation of proceeds was reasonable and lawful

Ratio Decidendi

Majority (Bastarache, LeBel, Deschamps, Charron JJ.): On correctness review the Board lacked jurisdiction—neither the express statutory text nor the doctrine of jurisdiction by necessary implication authorizes the Board to allocate proceeds of a utility’s asset sale to ratepayers; the Board’s plenary power to impose conditions in the public interest must be read in context of the rate-setting regulatory scheme and cannot be used to appropriate private property; additionally, the Board’s exercise of discretion in this case was unreasonable because it had explicitly found no harm to customers and identified no public interest justification.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed

Orders

  • City of Calgary appeal dismissed
  • ATCO cross-appeal allowed