People

Services

Industries

Firm

About

Knowledge

Careers

News

Events

Contact

Connect

Privacy Policy

Manage Cookies

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Accessibility

Payments

Legal

Calgary

Toronto

Edmonton

Ottawa

Vancouver

New York

Montréal

Keely Cameron

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Partner

Gracie Boser

Articling Student

The Alberta Court of Appeal has clarified the nature of co-lessee liability for unpaid Crown royalties under the Mines and Minerals Act. In two companion decisions, the Court confirmed that co-lessees are jointly (not jointly and severally) liable, meaning a claim extinguished against one may impact all. The decisions also address how vesting orders and insolvency stays affect the Crown&rsquo;s ability to pursue royalty arrears.

Vesting Order Bars Claims

 However Co-Lessee Liability for Unpaid Crown Royalties May Remain

Vesting Order Bars Claims for Unpaid Crown Royalties

Chyna Brown

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary 

Associate

In Royal Bank of Canada v Patterson Dental Canada Inc, the Alberta Court of Appeal clarified how PPSA priority rules apply where assets used in a corporate business are personally owned by a director. The Court confirmed that ownership and registration against the correct debtor are decisive in priority disputes, and provided guidance on the treatment of leases and the proper distribution of holdbacks in insolvency sales.

Alberta Court of Appeal Clarifies PPSA Priorities in Insolvency Sales

Luke Morrison

Energy Project Development, M&A, and Commercial Transaction Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

Years after an insolvency proceeding is closed, can a solvent co-lessee/working interest participant (WIP) still be on the hook for their former partner’s share of unpaid Crown royalties? A recent Alberta Court of Appeal decision to allow an appeal in <a href="https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abca/doc/2025/2025abca181/2025abca181.html">Spartan Delta Corp v Alberta (Energy and Minerals), 2025 ABCA 181</a> [Spartan Delta], raises concerns around whether the answer to such question can be 'yes'. The oil and gas industry is closely tracking the outcome of this appeal (anticipated to be heard in Fall 2025) on the basis that if the appeal were to be granted it would create uncertainty for upstream oil & gas joint interest owners as to the impact of insolvency proceedings on existing liabilities (and would have implications for purchasers and WIPs alike in relation to oil & gas M&A out of insolvency proceedings).

Spartan Delta Corp

Spartan Delta Appeal Raises Uncertainty for Co-Lessees After Insolvency

Kelsey J. Meyer KC

Restructuring & Insolvency Lawyer | Commercial Litigation

Sarah Aaron

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Calgary

In late May, the Supreme Court of Canada (the SCC) denied an application for leave to appeal a decision of the Court of Appeal of Alberta, which, in turn, had denied leave to appeal of the decision of the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta in Re Mantle Materials Group, Ltd, 2023 ABKB 488 (Mantle KB). The decision in Mantle KB held that the interests of secured creditors are subordinate to environmental obligations pursuant to the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, thus confirming that the priority of environmental obligations determined by the SCC in Orphan Well Association v Grant Thornton Ltd, 2019 SCC 5 applies beyond the oil and gas industry.

Supreme Court of Canada Dismisses Leave on Leave in Mantle Materials Group The Priority

Supreme Court of Canada Dismisses Leave-on-Leave in Mantle Materials Group: The Priority of Environmental Obligations Extends Beyond the Oil & Gas Industry

Akhila Sandhu

Summer Student

Morgan Sutherland

Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Associate 

Michael C. Smith

Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

The United Nations has adopted the first global regulatory framework for Automated Driving Systems, establishing safety, cybersecurity, testing and monitoring requirements for Level 3, 4 and 5 automated vehicles. This article examines the framework&rsquo;s implications for Canada, including how Transport Canada may incorporate the requirements into domestic vehicle safety standards and what manufacturers and suppliers should consider as regulation evolves.

First Global Regulatory Framework For Autonomous Vehicles

First Global Regulatory Framework For Autonomous Vehicles: Key Takeaways For Canada And The Auto Industry

Ethan Z. Schiff

Class Actions & Commercial Litigation Lawyer

The Supreme Court of Canada&rsquo;s decision in SS&amp;C Technologies Canada Corporation v. Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, 2026 SCC 29, revisits the doctrine of spoliation and confirms that courts must draw an adverse inference when intentional destruction of relevant evidence is established. The decision provides guidance on the test for spoliation, the scope of mandatory adverse inferences and the importance of preserving evidence during litigation.

The Supreme Court of Canada Affirms Mandatory Adverse Inference in Cases of Spoliation

The Supreme Court of Canada Affirms Mandatory Adverse Inference for Spoliation

Dominique T. Hussey

Chief Executive Officer and Intellectual Property Litigator, Pharma/Biotech and Trademark Lawyer

Chief Executive Officer

Vincent M. de Grandpré

IP Lawyer | Life Sciences & Tech

Emily P. Kettel

Intellectual Property Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Partner, Trademark Agent

In Pharmascience v. Janssen Inc., the Supreme Court of Canada reaffirmed that methods of medical treatment remain unpatentable subject matter under the Patent Act because they are directed to the professional skill and judgment of healthcare practitioners. At the same time, the Court upheld the patentability of the dosing regimen claims at issue, clarifying that not all therapeutic or treatment-related claims constitute unpatentable methods of medical treatment. The decision provides important guidance on assessing patent eligibility for pharmaceutical and life sciences innovations in Canada.

Supreme Court of Canada Reaffirms that  Methods of Medical Treatment are Unpatentable

Supreme Court of Canada Confirms That Medical Professional Skill and Judgment Are Excluded From the Patent Bargain

Evana Yukanna

Commercial Litigation Lawyer at Bennett Jones Toronto

Ontario court denies a late class action opt-out request, reinforcing settlement finality and confirming prejudice can arise before court approval.

Ontario Court Reinforces Finality of Class Proceedings in Rejecting Late Opt Out Request

Ontario Court Reinforces Finality of Class Proceedings in Rejecting Late Opt-Out Request

Martin Ignasiak KC

Energy & Industrial Projects Lawyer

Head of Energy Regulatory

Tyler McDonough

Logan Lazurko

Energy & Regulatory Lawyer | Environmental

On June 17, 2026, the Alberta Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed an appeal by Fort McMurray 468 First Nation challenging an Alberta Energy Regulator decision that the First Nation lacked standing to request regulatory appeals of approvals issued to AdhMor Ltd. for an oilfield waste management facility near Fort McMurray. The decision in Fort McMurray 468 First Nation v Alberta Energy Regulator, 2026 ABCA 197, offers important guidance on what it takes to get in the door at the AER.

Alberta Court of Appeal Confirms Cumulative Effects are no Substitute for Evidence

No Standing Without Specifics: Alberta Court of Appeal Confirms that Cumulative Effects are no Substitute for Evidence

Title Alphabetical

Title

normal

Keely Cameron: A New Future for Inactive Wells

From the Same Authors