In its first speech from the throne, the new Government of Canada concedes that the former Government’s Bill C-38 that in 2012 amended the National Energy Board Act and was consequently challenged constitutionally in Quarmby et al by Martin + Associates commencing in May, 2015 (see below) deprived the NEB of its social authority to make decisions that would engender public respect.  The throne speech promised substantial reform to the NEB processes to restore and meaningful processes for consultation, the gathering and assessment of evidence and decision making.  Martin + Associates is pleased that the new Government of Canada has effectively consented to the remedy sought in the constitutional challenge that it prosecuted during 2015.

As previously reported M+A is prosecuting an action for a declaration that the anti-scientific, anti-public participation provisions of section 55.2 of the National Energy Board Act (the “NEB Act”), provisions imposed by the Harper government, violate the freedom of expression guarantees of the Canadian Constitution. Our application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada in Lynne M. Quarmby, et al. v. Attorney General of Canada, et al. was filed on March 21, 2015 (see prior post below). ‎ The Response of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers may be viewed here. ‎The Responses of Kinder Morgan and the Attor‎ney General of Canada may be viewed here  and here.  M+A’s final Reply was filed on May 4th,2015 and may be viewed here.
Many Intervenors have made submissions to the SCC that leave to appeal should be granted (view here, here, here, here, here, and here).
On April 30, 2015 the Supreme Court of Canada granted leave to appeal to a litigant alleging that the Alberta Energy Regulator (formerly the Energy Resources Conservation Board) violated her right to freedom of expression ‎by refusing to hear and take into account her objections to the issuance of permits for natural gas fracking on lands adjacent to her ranch located in Rosebud, Alberta. The decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal from which leave to appeal has been granted may be viewed here
On today’s‎ date all of the submissions related to the Quarmby et al leave to appeal application have been referred for a decision to a three judge panel of the Supreme Court of Canada consisting of Chief Justice McLachlin, along with Justices Wagner and Gascon.  The Charter s (2)(b) right to freedom of expression hangs in the balance.

On July 9, 2014 a senior Chinese business man was arrested at Vancouver Airport pursuant to an Interpol Red Notice requested by France and a follow on Extradition Act arrest warrant alleging that the business man had participated in a conspiracy to defraud a large French company along with related offences , including money laundering.  The business man was released on bail after a lengthy contested bail hearing following which he instructed M+A to vigorously defend against the French extradition request. In order to carry out it’s assignment M+A retained senior French lawyers and then conducted extensive factual investigations in all of China, Canada and France. The results of the M+A investigations were presented to the French prosecutors and “Judge d’ Instruction” with the result that on today’s date the French authorities instructed Canada to withdraw their extradition request. In the result the extradition proceedings are now dismissed.

M+A  announced today that it had filed an appli‎cation for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada on behalf of a citizen’s coalition in its continued pursuit of a Charter s 2 (b) freedom of expression constitutional challenge to the provisions of s.55.2 of the National Energy Board Act which the NEB has used to aggressively impose participation and content limits on hearings related to proposed energy infrastructure projects.

The full text of the application can be viewed here.

The Globe and Mail coverage of the announcement can be viewed here.

February 22, 2015:  M+A commenced a further civil lawsuit against the RCMP and the BC Director of Civil Forfeiture seeking damages for the wrongful criminal prosecution and attempt at forfeiture brought against Mrs. Mumtaz Ladha and her family.

The Notice of Civil Claim can be viewed here.

Reports related to the announcement of the commencement of the Claim contained in the Globe & Mail and Vancouver Sun may be viewed here and here,  respectively. 

A‎n audio of an interview that Mr.Martin gave the the CBC’s national evening radio news show “As it Happens” on Feb 22 appears here.   


On January 31, 2015 the CTV investigative journalism programme, “W5” aired a segment examining the outcome in M+A’s civil suit against the CBSA for defamation and the destruction of the business of Steve DeJaray flowing from wrongful charges laid against him as described in more detail in this “News” report below. The “W5” investigative report may be viewed here. 

In November 2014, the Attorney General of Canada filed its Statement of Defence to the BCCLA’s application to the Federal Court for a declaration that the legislation purporting to authorize the Canadian Communications Security Establishment (CSEC) from operating without judicial oversight violates s.8 of the Charter. The Statement of Defence can be viewed here.

Martin and Associates filed an application seeking leave to appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal, in its continued prosecution of a Charter s.2(b) constitutional challenge to the CAPP sponsored limiting provisions of the new s.55.2 of the National Energy Board. The memorandum can be viewed here.

Interpol again set aside yet another Red Notice issued in relation to Napoleon Gomez Urrutia, the President of the Mexico Miners Union, issued on July 28, 2014. The new Red Notice was set aside following a final ruling on August 28, 2014 by Mexico’s Fourth Collegiate Tribunal, quashing all outstanding arrest warrants in Mexico. The notice to set aside the Red Notice can be viewed here.

Martin + Associates sues CBSA for damages arising from it’s detention and interrogation of Stanley Tomchin, along with a permanent injunction prohibiting CBSA from transferring the product of the interrogation to US authorities. The full text of the statement of claim can be viewed here.