The Alberta Court of Appeal today released its decision in relation to Mr. Martin’s challenge to certain provisions of the Alberta Securities Act which permit the Securities Commission to transfer compelled testimony without judicial supervision.  The judgment of the Court may be found here.

Martin + Associates has been instructed to apply to the Supreme Court of Canada to seek leave to appeal from this decision.

Mr. Martin’s Op-Ed “What Happened to Liberal promises on NEB?” is published and can be found here.

Notwithstanding the new Government of Canada’s throne speech promise to amend the NEB Act, the NEB has been permitted to continue with the Kinder Morgan hearings,  The City of Vancouver, City of Burnaby and City of West Vancouver all filed detailed memorandum before the NEB opposing the approval of the Kinder Morgan pipeline.  These memorandum can be found in the following links: Vancouver, Burnaby, West Vancouver.

Mr. Martin’s work on behalf of clients to obtain the removal of Interpol Red Notices and his calls for the reform of Interpol itself were discussed in a Globe and Mail National Business Front Page page story entitled “Interpol faces scrutiny over its global arrest alerts”.  The Globe article may be found here.  Mr. Martin’s earlier call for the reform of Interpol in the pages of the Internal Bar Association Journal may be found here.

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 March, 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.