Recent Judicial Decisions of Interest to Energy Lawyers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The second year of the COVID-19 pandemic continued to impact the Canadian economy, commercial activity, and the legal system in general. Courts, tribunals, legislatures, law firms, corporations, and workers all learned to adapt to remote working, remote hearings, and new ways of living. Within the crisis came opportunities to modernize systems and think about new ways of accessing justice. This article summarizes a number of recent judicial decisions of interest to energy lawyers. The authors review key case law from several broad areas, including: Indigenous and First Nations law; contractual interpretation; environmental law; tax law; corporate and securities law; bankruptcy and insolvency; and constitutional law. In each area of law, the authors will provide insight on the significance and potential implications of these decisions on the Canadian energy industry. The authors also canvas more specific topics, such as: economic interests and the Crown’s duty to consult; the Canada Revenue Agency’s priority ranking in the restructuring process; the ability of receivers to disclaim an agreement in the bankruptcy process and unilaterally impose go-forward terms on a secured party; the priority of builders’ liens in the face of abandonment and reclamation obligations; the evolution of the “reverse vesting order”; and provincial control over resources.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".