JASPER RESEARCH SEMINAR 2026 – PAPERS OVERVIEW
The Jasper Research Seminar 2026 papers will be published in late March 2026.
Seminar Moderator: David R. Percy, K.C.
Professor David Percy was Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Alberta from 2002 until 2009 and in 2019-2020. He holds the Borden Ladner Gervais Chair in Energy Law and Policy and also has research interests in Water Law and Contracts. He is co-editor of Contracts: Cases and Commentaries, now entering its twelfth edition and used at law schools across Canada. He wrote The Framework of Water Rights Legislation in Canada, as well as books on Wetlands and Groundwater. Professor Percy is a former President of the Canadian Association of Law Teachers. Professor Percy has received major teaching awards at the national, University and Faculty levels. In 2013, he was awarded the University Cup, the highest honour a University of Alberta academic can receive for research, teaching and service to the University and to the community. Dean Percy was an international rugby referee and continues his interest in Alberta rugby at a more relaxed level. He is an avid tennis player and a keen hiker. He regularly attends local theatre events and is a long time supporter of the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra. He also enjoys chasing down grandchildren in Chicago and Brisbane.
THURSDAY, JUNE 18
8:15 AM – 9:00 AM
Aboriginal Title, Private Property, and the Law of Declaratory Relief
Authors: Jared Enns, Emilie Cox, Mackenzie Hayden, Devon Campbell (Cassels)
Investor confidence in Canada depends on a land title system that is both predictable and certain. This paper offers an in-depth analysis of the contemporary legal framework governing Aboriginal title, private property, and the law of declaratory relief in Canada. It examines how inconsistent lower court decisions contribute to land title uncertainty and proposes an approach that balances the need for effective remedies with the stability necessary to protect land interests.
Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) jurisprudence has affirmed key principles of Aboriginal title and clarified the remedies available when Indigenous communities have been dispossessed of ancestral lands. However, conflicting lower court decisions on the interaction between Aboriginal title and fee simple interests have introduced significant uncertainty into land registry systems and tenures across Canada. This is particularly relevant in British Columbia, where Aboriginal title claims remain largely unresolved. Divergent rulings from lower courts, which at times have recognized Aboriginal title over private lands, have created considerable legal uncertainty. Since fee simple interests represent the highest form of land ownership in the common law, their potential vulnerability to Aboriginal title claims also raises significant concerns about the status of subordinate interests, including leases, easements, and energy transmission rights-of-way.
Developments in Canada, including the energy sector, rely on certainty as the basis of longterm security and investment decisions. This certainty is diminished where proposed developments intersect with unresolved Aboriginal title claims. The increasing prevalence of litigation and conflicting judicial interpretations warrant a thorough and systematic analysis to inform policy decisions, negotiations, dispute resolution processes, and future jurisprudence.
Reconciling Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal land interests remains central to the ongoing development of energy and resource projects in Canada. This paper presents a framework for addressing conflicts related to Aboriginal title that is consistent with existing SCC jurisprudence, and suggests an appropriate remedy that upholds Aboriginal rights, safeguards private property interests, and facilitates certainty for project development. By prioritizing equitable compensation and reconciliatory justice, the authors propose a path toward durable solutions that reduce litigation risks for both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities, which is essential to provide the required certainty to maintain investor confidence.
9:15 AM – 10:00 AM
Powering the Prairie Province: Regulatory Pathways and Project Development for Small Nuclear Reactors in Saskatchewan
Authors: Brandon Hicks, Brett Ledingham (McDougall Gauley LLP)
Nuclear energy has long been touted as one of the key answers to the climate crisis, but it has been over 20 years since a new nuclear powerplant has been constructed in Canada. Saskatchewan is looking to change that narrative by being the third province in Canada to develop nuclear power generation capabilities. A Call to Action: A Canadian Roadmap for Small Modular Reactors, published in 2018 by a joint steering committee of select provincial governments, territorial governments, and power utilities concludes that “[e]xisting regulatory and legislative process are ready for SMR deployment in Canada” with little substantiation within the report. Complacency in the strength of our existing regulatory frameworks could result in a legal landscape where nuclear project proponents are trying to shoe-horn 21st century technologies into aged and outdated regulatory regimes causing delays, cost-overruns, and uncertainty that may result in the abandonment of otherwise potentially successful and beneficial energy projects.
Without legislative and regulatory updates to reflect the current realities of our social fabric and the rapid pace of technology development in nuclear reactor design, there is a real and substantial possibility that Saskatchewan will be ineffective in bringing a nuclear power generation program to life, wasting both resources and time in the fight against climate change. Key regulatory updates at both the provincial and federal level will almost certainly be required in order to provide for project certainty and the additional ancillary supports and infrastructure to grow this industry.
The claim that Canada’s regulatory regime is ready for SMR deployment is far reaching and broad in scope. This paper takes a critical view of this claim in the Roadmap report, with a specific lens on the Province of Saskatchewan. Looking at key regulatory sectors, managed under federal and provincial heads of power, this paper examines whether federal and provincial regulation is actually ready for SMR deployment, and if not, what can be done within the legislature and through government policy to ensure that our governments are ready for next-gen nuclear energy.
10:00 AM – 10:45 AM
Shifting Winds: The Emerging Legal and Regulatory Regime for Offshore Renewable Energy
Authors: Michael Simms, Daniel Watt, Lucia Westin-Eastaugh (McInnes Cooper)
In contrast to Europe and, to a lesser extent, the United States, Canada’s regulatory framework for offshore renewable energy has emerged slowly, despite the global drive to transition to renewable energy sources. This pace is in part the result of Canada’s constitutional structure, which not only involves overlapping jurisdiction within this regulatory space, but also leaves the maritime boundaries of the Atlantic Provinces uncertain in some areas. These features effectively demand federal-provincial cooperation, most recently demonstrated by the incorporation of responsibility for offshore renewable energy in the Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador offshore areas into the purview of the former Offshore Petroleum Boards. The federal government’s response to shifting international political realities, including the enactment of the Building Canada Act, may accelerate offshore renewable energy projects, while increasing the complexity surrounding the emerging regulatory regime.
This paper first places the offshore renewable energy regime in context by describing how Canada’s constitutional structure allocates both necessary legislative powers and the ownership or sovereign control of offshore submerged lands between the federal and provincial governments. With that context in mind, the key offshore renewable energy regimes are explored, including the federal Canadian Energy Regulator Act, Part V, the joint federal-provincial regimes under the so-called Accord Acts, the federal Impact Assessment Act and applicable provincial legislation. Next, the paper discusses Indigenous considerations, both from a constitutional and commercial perspective. The paper also examines the Building Canada Act, Bill C-5, and offers thoughts on how that Act may affect the development of offshore renewable energy projects in Canada. Finally, regulatory regimes for interconnection and transmission (including marine, onshore and interprovincial) are addressed, together with some initial thoughts on off-take arrangements.
11:00AM – 11:45 AM
RECENT JUDICIAL DECISIONS OF INTEREST TO ENERGY LAWYERS: GORRs and Security and WIPs, Oh My!
Authors: Sarah Aaron (Bennett Jones LLP), Keely Cameron (Bennett Jones LLP), Miles Pittman (Borden Ladner Gervais LLP)
2025 was a year of significant uncertainty given geopolitical challenges, fractures in historical trade relationships and a movement away from emission reductions. This uncertainty led to around 4,840 business insolvencies where Courts and stakeholders continue to grapple with questions of when assets can be sold, what obligations must be assumed by purchasers and what may fall on the shoulders of working interest partners. This paper reviews and summarizes recent judicial decisions from across Canada focusing on decisions that we anticipate will have profound implications for energy transactions going forward.
FRIDAY, JUNE 19
8:15 AM – 9:00 AM
RECENT REGULATORY AND LEGISLATIVE DEVELOPMENTS OF INTEREST TO ENERGY LAWYERS
Authors: Taylor Campbell, Nick Ettinger, Caitlin Graham, Alyssa Marshall (Alberta Utilities Commission), David Wood (Torys LLP)
This paper provides an overview of recent regulatory and legislative developments of interest to Canadian energy lawyers from April 2025 to March 2026. It includes discussions of recent regulatory decisions and related judicial decisions, and changes to regulatory and legislative regimes impacting energy law. This paper will also discuss and comment on a number of ongoing regulatory and legislative developments to watch in the coming year.
9:15 AM – 10:00 AM
SURF’S UP – RIDING THE ROV WAVE IN OIL AND GAS INSOLVENCIES
Authors: Ryan Zahara, Tom Collopy, Erinn Wilson (MLT Aikins LLP) and Lars De Pauw (Orphan Well Association)
A purchaser seeking to buy the going-concern business of a debtor through an insolvency proceeding has two options: (i) to purchase the assets or shares of the debtor through a typical asset or share purchase agreement; or (ii) to have the old shares of the debtor company cancelled and have new shares issued in the purchasers name, while moving all unwanted liabilities to a holding company. The first option is then approved by the court through a standard sale approval and vesting order, while the second option is approved by the court by way of a reverse vesting order (“RVO”).
In the past 5 years, the use of RVOs in insolvency proceedings has gone from being classified as extraordinary relief to now being a common way for complex restructuring matters to be resolved. During this time a body of case law has developed which provides insolvency practitioners and parties purchasing assets through insolvency proceedings with important guidance on the circumstances and evidence necessary for a court to approve this type of transaction. The industry in which the insolvent debtor operates is an important factor the court will consider. Highly regulated industries, such as cannabis or oil and gas, are two of the industries where the courts have found RVOs to be necessary and appropriate given the barriers a purchaser may face with respect to the transfer of licensing and permits.
Despite the court’s general appetite for granting RVOs in the proceedings involving oil and gas assets, there remains several important considerations to keep in mind when completing these types of transactions. This paper aims at summarizing some of these challenges and providing specific recommendations for prospective purchasers and their advisors to keep in mind when assessing the utility and completing transactions approved by way of RVO. There have been a number of recent examples of how these transactions have been utilized in distressed oil and gas transactions (to various effect) and we will look at some of these examples, including, but not limited to, AlphaBow Energy Ltd., Long Run Exploration Ltd. and Cleo Energy Corp.
This paper addresses the following: (i) the role of the Alberta Energy Regulator and the Orphan Well Association in these transactions in oil and gas insolvencies: (ii) key consideration regarding the structure and drafting of the transactional documents, including the share purchase agreements and how that agreement works in conjunction with the form of the RVO being sought from the Court (including the approaches to cure costs in such proceedings); (iii) the impact of such transactions on various stakeholders, including working interest partners and operators of assets being conveyed.
10:15 AM – 11:00 AM
Data Centre Integration and the Protection of Ratepayers – Can Alberta Balance These Goals?
Authors: Andrew McLeod, Laura-Marie Berg, Jane Grey (PEAK Legal Counsel)
The Alberta government has put forward a strategy to attract data centres to the province, seeking to become “North America’s destination of choice for AI-enabled data centre investment”. In pursuing this strategy, the government has also pledged to evaluate off-grid and grid-connected power solutions so that affordability and reliability for Albertans and local industries are not compromised.
The efforts to attract data centres to Alberta are occurring in a context where data centre growth in other jurisdictions has contributed to significant increases in electricity costs, with a recent report suggesting an increase of up to 267% in wholesale electricity prices over the past five years in areas of the United States located near significant data centre activity. A recent report by the Independent Marketing Monitor (“IMM”) for PJM found significant cost increases for other customers due to the combination of existing and forecast data centre demand. Noting that this is not a normal “supply and demand” matter, the IMM wrote that “The growth in data center load and the expected future growth in data center load are unique and unprecedented and uncertain and require a different approach….”
This paper will examine Alberta’s current approach to data centres, with a focus on rate impacts to existing ratepayers. Lessons from other jurisdictions will also be examined, with a view to whether policy and rate design can reduce or eliminate negative impacts on ratepayers in Alberta’s unique energy market.
11:15 AM – 12:00 PM
From Energy Idealism to Energy Realism: The Canada-Alberta MOU and the New Global Paradigm in Energy and Climate Policy
Authors: Simon Kupi, Bernard J. Roth, Emma Hand (Dentons), Thomas Schubert (Dentons), Matthew Davis (Capital Power)
Commentary on the Canada-Alberta Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) of November 2025 has focused on its significant potential domestic implications, both for resolving long-simmering political tensions between its signatories on matters of energy and the environment and for reviving Canada’s strategy of becoming a “global energy superpower.” However, the MOU can also be understood as part of a broader, global paradigm shift on energy development that has emerged in reaction to the aggressive steps toward decarbonization embraced, to varying degrees, across the western world over the last quarter-century. This paper proposes to document the transition from energy idealism to energy realism: a re-evaluation of energy and climate policies being shaped by a confluence of geopolitical, social, economic and reliability challenges calling into question whether the aspirations of the Paris Agreement era can be reconciled with reality.
The authors will survey developments in Canada, the United States and Europe to consider how this shift is disrupting the decarbonization project in each region and reshaping its legal and regulatory underpinnings. Cornerstone climate policies have been shelved or recalibrated in response to public backlash and inflationary pressures. Policymakers and regulators have been grappling with the reliability consequences of the push toward renewable generation, prompting a reappraisal of the role for gas-fired and nuclear power. In the wake of the Russia-Ukraine War and escalating trade tensions, economic security imperatives have been reshaping energy flows and fueling governments’ efforts to fund and fast-track strategic infrastructure. Against this backdrop, the MOU seeks out a middle ground: reaffirming Canada’s commitment to carbon pricing and emissions-reduction investments while pursuing opportunities to power large-scale AI data centres and a dramatic expansion of Canada’s energy exports. The paper will explore whether the MOU’s ambition to balance economic and climate objectives offers a credible path forward—and whether the ultimate success of Canada’s new path to decarbonization hinges on its ability to find common cause with its trading partners in a world of shifting and unsteady alliances.
——————-
SATURDAY, JUNE 20
9:00 AM – 10:00 AM
RICHARD RIEGERT MEMORIAL LECTURE: From Gridlock to Greenlight: the New Blueprint for Getting Major Projects Built in Canada
Authors: Sander Duncanson, Brad Gilmour, Sean Sutherland, Ian Clarke, Laura Scott (Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt), Peter Feldberg, Major Projects Office, Government of Canada, Kristen Lozynsky (Enbridge Inc.)
Canada faces a decisive moment in reconciling its ambitions for economic growth, energy security, and decarbonization with an approvals system that has too often produced extended timelines, uncertain outcomes, and jurisdictional conflict. This paper will critically analyze the legislative architecture and intergovernmental framework that has emerged to break the gridlock – Bill C-5 and the creation of the Major Projects Office – assessing whether these initiatives can deliver the regulatory reform necessary to attract mobile capital and advance projects of national interest. We will also consider the impact of the November 2025 Canada-Alberta Memorandum of Understanding, which signals a shift in the Canada-Alberta energy relationship from a decade of conflict to a new era of cooperation. Together, these developments offer hopes of meaningful systemic changes: finally achieving the “one project — one review” model; changing the review focus from “whether” to build national interest projects to “how” to build national interest projects; and accelerated approvals, all while maintaining rigorous environmental protection and upholding the rights of Indigenous peoples.
Drawing on input from co-authors from the Major Projects Office and the pipeline sector, this paper will provide critical assessment and practical insights on implementation of the recent federal reforms, recommendations to address remaining key barriers to project development, and practical guidance on how project proponents can successfully advance projects under this new framework.
——————-
Questions?
If you have questions regarding the CELF Jasper Research Seminar, please contact us at seminars@energylawfoundation.ca or at 1-800-281-0697.
EVENTS