Canada Case Law

Swist v. MEG Energy Corp.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court's construction of key claim language (notably that "generating" requires a causal, material and substantial effect from injection/operation of the third well) was supported by expert evidence and properly focused on disputed terms; appellants failed to prove MEG's operations met the causal "generating" element, and independent prior art (Arthur, Brannan, Cyr patents) disclosed the essential elements of claim 1 such that claims 1-8 were anticipated; no reversible error was shown on construction, infringement or anticipation, so the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Claim construction
• Infringement
• Validity
• Anticipation
• Obviousness
• Inutility

Read case analysis

Progress Energy Canada Ltd. v. Salustro

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Judicial review of a Surface Rights Board rent decision was partly allowed. The court set aside findings on foreseeable future farming and tangible impacts, but upheld the rest.

• Standard of review
• Evidentiary onus
• Surface rights compensation
• Nuisance and disturbance
• Comparables in rent determination
• Remittal to tribunal

Read case analysis

Mobil Oil Canada Ltd. v. Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board

Court

Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada held that a s. 71(1) significant discovery application required a fresh offshore well, but that the chairman’s summary refusal breached fairness.

• Significant discovery declaration
• Procedural fairness / natural justice
• Statutory interpretation
• Administrative delegation
• Mandamus and certiorari
• Administrative-law

Read case analysis