Connect with us

Alberta

Chris Scott and Rebecca Ingram attempting Class Action Lawsuit against Province for COVID restrictions

Published

17 minute read

Could open the door for business owners across the province to seek damages for financial losses

News release regarding this class action lawsuit from Rath & Company

Rath & Company has launched a class action lawsuit against the Province of Alberta on behalf of business owners in Alberta who faced operational restrictions due to, now deemed illegal, Public Health Orders. This lawsuit follows the recent Ingram Decision by the Calgary Court of King’s Bench, which declared that all of Dr. Hinshaw’s Public Health Orders were ultra vires, in other words illegal or not lawfully enacted. The Ingram Decision has opened the door for affected business owners to seek damages for the financial losses incurred due to the restrictions imposed by these unlawful Public Health Orders.

The lawsuit names Rebecca Ingram and Chris Scott as representative plaintiffs who suffered significant financial harm due to Dr. Hinshaw’s Public Health Orders. On February 7, 2024, the parties attended their first case conference with Justice Feasby of the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta to establish the next steps. The lawyers for the Province of Alberta made it clear that they intend to oppose the class action certification. Premier Smith has yet to comment on the government opposition to compensate individual business owners impacted by Dr. Hinshaw’s unlawful Public Health Orders.

“This marks the first of many procedural and substantive steps. This is an important case about
government actions and overreach during a time when business owners were unlawfully mandated to close their businesses at moments notice. It will give Albertans the opportunity to hold the Alberta government accountable and seek fair compensation on behalf of the many businesses impacted by Deena Hinshaw’s many unlawful decisions,” said lead counsel Jeffrey Rath.

The class action represents all impacted Alberta business owners. If you have been adversely affected and wish to join this class action lawsuit, please register by completing the online form at Business Class Action – Rath&Company (rathandcompany.com). Should the Court grant permission for this action to proceed as a “Class Action” (also known as “Certification”), you may qualify as a class member whether or not you have registered.

“In what world is it fair for small business owners to bear the financial brunt for the benefit of the entire province? Our hope is that this lawsuit brings justice to the affected business owners who suffered significant hardship and losses without justification or consideration by the province’s harsh and unilateral actions,” Mr. Rath continued.

From Rath & Company

Business Class Action Update – October 1, 2021

The Certification Hearing scheduled with Justice Feasby will be available for online viewing. Below are the details you need to join the session:

Date and Time:

  • October 2 and 3, 2024, at 10:00 AM (Mountain Time, UTC-06:00)

Join Online:

Join by Phone:

  • Dial-In Number: +1-780-851-3573 (Canada Toll – Edmonton)
  • Access Code: 277 254 26969

PLEASE NOTE – Recording or rebroadcasting of this hearing is strictly prohibited.

Documents related to this matter that have been filed to date are available for viewing online – see links BELOW.

We encourage all interested parties to observe the proceedings.

Summary of the Covid Business Restrictions Class Action Lawsuit

Rath & Company has commenced a Class Action lawsuit against the provincial government of Alberta on behalf of business owners who faced operational restrictions due to Public Health Orders during the COVID-19 pandemic. This lawsuit aims to secure financial compensation for businesses in Alberta that were either fully or partially restricted by these health orders.

The legal foundation of this case is anchored in the recent Ingram decision by the Calgary Court of King’s Bench, which determined that the Public Health Orders were not enacted lawfully.

The primary plaintiffs in this lawsuit are two Alberta business owners who suffered considerable financial losses due to the imposed Public Health Orders.

This legal action represents an opportunity for business owners who were operational in Alberta from 2020 to 2022 and were impacted by these health directives.

If you are among those affected and are interested in joining this class action lawsuit as a member of the group, we invite you to register with us. To do so, please complete our intake form.

This is an intake form for use by our legal team. Information provided in this form will be used to assist us in moving the Class Action case forward.

If the Court permits the action to proceed as a “Class Action” (this is called “Certification”), you may be a Class Member. You will receive a notice if the action is Certified that will explain your rights as a Class Member.

Please Complete this Form to the best of your ability and it will be sent directly to: [email protected]

 

To Review the Class Action Documents Click Here:

  • Notice of Application
  • Business Class Action Statement of Claim
  • Business Class Action Plaintiffs Brief
  • Business Class Action Provinces Brief
  • Business Class Action Plaintiffs Reply
  • Affidavit of Rebecca Ingram
  • Affidavit of Christopher Scott
  • Affidavit of Dana Hogemann – Senior
  • Assistant Deputy Minister, Treasury Board Secretariat
  • Affidavit of Andy Ridge – Incident Commander of the Emergency Operations Centre with the Ministry of Health
  • Affidavit and Expert Report of Randy Popik – Chartered Accountant at Kingston Ross Pasnak LLP
  • Affidavit and Expert Report of Christopher Cotton – Professor of Economics at Queen’s University
  • Scott Transcript
  • Ridge Undertaking
  • Ridge Transcript
  • Cotton Undertaking
  • Cotton Transcript
  • Popik Undertaking
  • Popik Transcript
  • Ingram Transcript
  • Eberle-Morris Transcript
  • Hogemann Transcript
  •  Ingram Decision

Covid Business Losses Class Action Intake Form

0 / 400

Thank you for your participation. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

Business Class Action Update – October 1, 2024

The Certification Hearing scheduled with Justice Feasby will be available for online viewing. Below are the details you need to join the session:

Date and Time:

  • October 2 and 3, 2024, at 10:00 AM (Mountain Time, UTC-06:00)

Join Online:

Join by Phone:

  • Dial-In Number: +1-780-851-3573 (Canada Toll – Edmonton)
  • Access Code: 277 254 26969

PLEASE NOTE – Recording or rebroadcasting of this hearing is strictly prohibited.

Business Class Action Update – June 21, 2024

The government of Alberta has taken the position of opposing the certification of our proposed class action. As a result, we must go to court to get the lawsuit “certified” as a class action – this is known as the certification hearing.

The certification hearing is scheduled for October 2 and 3, 2024, before Justice Feasby. The following schedule has been agreed to leading up to the certification hearing:

We have uploaded the Plaintiffs Notice of Application and evidence in support as well as the government of Alberta’s evidence on our website. Specifically, on the website you can now find the:

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a Class Action Lawsuit?
A class action lawsuit is a legal action where a group of people collectively brings a claim to court. This type of lawsuit is distinct from individual cases, as it represents the interests and seeks compensation for a class of people who have been affected by similar acts of negligence or harmful practices. Class-action suits provide a more comprehensive approach to addressing widespread issues, allowing for a collective voice in legal proceedings. These lawsuits can be instrumental in achieving justice for a larger group and can potentially set precedents for future legal and protective standards.
What is certification?

The court must first assess whether the claim should be advanced in the form of a class action. The court will consider whether the claim shows an appropriate cause of action, an identifiable class of persons, and issues that are shared in common. The court will also determine whether a class action is a preferable procedure, and whether there is an appropriate representative plaintiff. If the class action is certified by the court, the representative plaintiff or plaintiffs will advance the case on behalf of all class members.

Am I a class member?

When a class action is certified, a definition of the class is provided. If you are an individual class member meeting the class description, then you do not need to sign up to be part of the class action – you are automatically included.

If you owned or operated a business in Alberta from 2020-2022 and wish to register with us as a member of the group, please fill out the intake form.
Do I have to pay to be part of the class action?
No. This class action will proceed on a contingency fee basis.  This means that the lawyers bringing the action will only be paid if the class action succeeds. If successful, the lawyers will be paid a portion of the settlement or judgment, but only if the Court approves.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Alberta’s grand bargain with Canada includes a new pipeline to Prince Rupert

Published on

From Resource Now

By

Alberta renews call for West Coast oil pipeline amid shifting federal, geopolitical dynamics.

Just six months ago, talk of resurrecting some version of the Northern Gateway pipeline would have been unthinkable. But with the election of Donald Trump in the U.S. and Mark Carney in Canada, it’s now thinkable.

In fact, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith seems to be making Northern Gateway 2.0 a top priority and a condition for Alberta staying within the Canadian confederation and supporting Mark Carney’s vision of making Canada an Energy superpower. Thanks to Donald Trump threatening Canadian sovereignty and its economy, there has been a noticeable zeitgeist shift in Canada. There is growing support for the idea of leveraging Canada’s natural resources and diversifying export markets to make it less vulnerable to an unpredictable southern neighbour.

“I think the world has changed dramatically since Donald Trump got elected in November,” Smith said at a keynote address Wednesday at the Global Energy Show Canada in Calgary. “I think that’s changed the national conversation.” Smith said she has been encouraged by the tack Carney has taken since being elected Prime Minister, and hopes to see real action from Ottawa in the coming months to address what Smith said is serious encumbrances to Alberta’s oil sector, including Bill C-69, an oil and gas emissions cap and a West Coast tanker oil ban. “I’m going to give him some time to work with us and I’m going to be optimistic,” Smith said. Removing the West Coast moratorium on oil tankers would be the first step needed to building a new oil pipeline line from Alberta to Prince Rupert. “We cannot build a pipeline to the west coast if there is a tanker ban,” Smith said. The next step would be getting First Nations on board. “Indigenous peoples have been shut out of the energy economy for generations, and we are now putting them at the heart of it,” Smith said.

Alberta currently produces about 4.3 million barrels of oil per day. Had the Northern Gateway, Keystone XL and Energy East pipelines been built, Alberta could now be producing and exporting an additional 2.5 million barrels of oil per day. The original Northern Gateway Pipeline — killed outright by the Justin Trudeau government — would have terminated in Kitimat. Smith is now talking about a pipeline that would terminate in Prince Rupert. This may obviate some of the concerns that Kitimat posed with oil tankers negotiating Douglas Channel, and their potential impacts on the marine environment.

One of the biggest hurdles to a pipeline to Prince Rupert may be B.C. Premier David Eby. The B.C. NDP government has a history of opposing oil pipelines with tooth and nail. Asked in a fireside chat by Peter Mansbridge how she would get around the B.C. problem, Smith confidently said: “I’ll convince David Eby.”

“I’m sensitive to the issues that were raised before,” she added. One of those concerns was emissions. But the Alberta government and oil industry has struck a grand bargain with Ottawa: pipelines for emissions abatement through carbon capture and storage.

The industry and government propose multi-billion investments in CCUS. The Pathways Alliance project alone represents an investment of $10 to $20 billion. Smith noted that there is no economic value in pumping CO2 underground. It only becomes economically viable if the tradeoff is greater production and export capacity for Alberta oil. “If you couple it with a million-barrel-per-day pipeline, well that allows you $20 billion worth of revenue year after year,” she said. “All of a sudden a $20 billion cost to have to decarbonize, it looks a lot more attractive when you have a new source of revenue.” When asked about the Prince Rupert pipeline proposal, Eby has responded that there is currently no proponent, and that it is therefore a bridge to cross when there is actually a proposal. “I think what I’ve heard Premier Eby say is that there is no project and no proponent,” Smith said. “Well, that’s my job. There will be soon.  “We’re working very hard on being able to get industry players to realize this time may be different.” “We’re working on getting a proponent and route.”

At a number of sessions during the conference, Mansbridge has repeatedly asked speakers about the Alberta secession movement, and whether it might scare off investment capital. Alberta has been using the threat of secession as a threat if Ottawa does not address some of the province’s long-standing grievances. Smith said she hopes Carney takes it seriously. “I hope the prime minister doesn’t want to test it,” Smith said during a scrum with reporters. “I take it seriously. I have never seen separatist sentiment be as high as it is now. “I’ve also seen it dissipate when Ottawa addresses the concerns Alberta has.” She added that, if Carney wants a true nation-building project to fast-track, she can’t think of a better one than a new West Coast pipeline. “I can’t imagine that there will be another project on the national list that will generate as much revenue, as much GDP, as many high paying jobs as a bitumen pipeline to the coast.”

Continue Reading

Alberta

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

The new government under Prime Minister Mark Carney recently delivered its throne speech, which set out the government’s priorities for the coming term. Unfortunately, on energy policy, Albertans are still waiting for clarity.

Prime Minister Carney’s position on energy policy has been confusing, to say the least. On the campaign trail, he promised to keep Trudeau’s arbitrary emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and Bill C-69 (which opponents call the “no more pipelines act”). Then, two weeks ago, he said his government will “change things at the federal level that need to be changed in order for projects to move forward,” adding he may eventually scrap both the emissions cap and Bill C-69.

His recent cabinet appointments further muddied his government’s position. On one hand, he appointed Tim Hodgson as the new minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson has called energy “Canada’s superpower” and promised to support oil and pipelines, and fix the mistrust that’s been built up over the past decade between Alberta and Ottawa. His appointment gave hope to some that Carney may have a new approach to revitalize Canada’s oil and gas sector.

On the other hand, he appointed Julie Dabrusin as the new minister of Environment and Climate Change. Dabrusin was the parliamentary secretary to the two previous environment ministers (Jonathan Wilkinson and Steven Guilbeault) who opposed several pipeline developments and were instrumental in introducing the oil and gas emissions cap, among other measures designed to restrict traditional energy development.

To confuse matters further, Guilbeault, who remains in Carney’s cabinet albeit in a diminished role, dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure less than 48 hours after Carney expressed conditional support for new pipelines.

The throne speech was an opportunity to finally provide clarity to Canadians—and specifically Albertans—about the future of Canada’s energy industry. During her first meeting with Prime Minister Carney, Premier Danielle Smith outlined Alberta’s demands, which include scrapping the emissions cap, Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which bans most oil tankers loading or unloading anywhere on British Columbia’s north coast (Smith also wants Ottawa to support an oil pipeline to B.C.’s coast). But again, the throne speech provided no clarity on any of these items. Instead, it contained vague platitudes including promises to “identify and catalyse projects of national significance” and “enable Canada to become the world’s leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy.”

Until the Carney government provides a clear plan to address the roadblocks facing Canada’s energy industry, private investment will remain on the sidelines, or worse, flow to other countries. Put simply, time is up. Albertans—and Canadians—need clarity. No more flip flopping and no more platitudes.

Tegan Hill

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X