Canada: "Scoping to Triggers" Approach Rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada

On January 21, 2010, the "scoping to triggers" approach employed by federal responsible authorities (RAs) under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) was decisively rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada. In MiningWatch Canada v. Canada (Fisheries and Oceans), 2010 SCC 2 (MiningWatch) the Court held that the Environmental Assessment (EA) tracking decision is determined according to the project as proposed by the proponent and not the project as scoped by the federal RA. This eliminates the previous discretion of RAs to define the scope of a project prior to the EA tracking decision.


The CEAA sets out five potential tracks for federal EA depending on the nature of a project: (i) no assessment; (ii) screening; (iii) comprehensive study; (iv) mediation; and (v) review panel. In the past, it had been the practice of RAs to determine the scope of the project first and then determine the appropriate EA track for the project as scoped. Some RAs exercised a "scoping to triggers" approach, whereby the scope of the project was limited to components of the proposal directly related to the powers, duties or functions that triggered the EA under s.5 of the CEAA. In many cases, "scoping to triggers" prior to the EA tracking decision would avoid a comprehensive study. Projects which undergo a comprehensive study are subjected to more intensive assessment, Ministerial oversight and mandatory public consultation, whereas a screening level EA is less rigorous.

In MiningWatch, the central issue before the Supreme Court of Canada was whether the EA track is determined by the project as proposed by a proponent or by the discretionary scoping decision of the federal RA. Previously, the Federal Court ruled that if the project as proposed by a proponent is listed in the Comprehensive Study List Regulations, the EA must be carried out by means of a comprehensive study. The Court held that the RA cannot subsequently rescope the project to downgrade the EA review track from a comprehensive study EA to a screening EA (2007 FC 955; see the November 9, 2007 Osler Update, Federal Court Disallows Scoping to Triggers"). This decision was subsequently overturned by the Federal Court of Appeal, which confirmed the RA's discretion to define the scope of a project for the purposes of EA tracking. (2008 FCA 209; see the June 17, 2008 Osler Update, Federal Court of Appeal Confirms "Scoping to Triggers" Approach").

In its decision the Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and held that the CEAA and its regulations require that the EA track be determined according to the project as proposed and that generally, the RA does not have the discretion to change the EA track. In other words, if a proposed project is listed in the Comprehensive Study List Regulations, it is not within the discretion of the RA to conduct a lower level EA screening. The RA or Minister, however, may have the discretion to enlarge the scope in the appropriate circumstances according to the Court. This discretion to enlarge the scope pursuant to s.15(2) or (3) of the CEAA acts as the exception to the general proposition that the level of assessment is determined solely based on the project as proposed by the proponent. It is curious that discretion pursuant to s.15 of the CEAA is only exercisable one way (to enlarge) which is not consistent with how "discretion" is generally understood.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the application for judicial review and issued a declaration that the RAs erred in failing to use the project as proposed by the proponent to determine whether it was to proceed by way of a comprehensive study. The Court declined to grant the broader relief that was awarded by the Federal Court trial judge (i.e., to set aside the RA's decision to proceed by way of screening and prohibit the issuing of permits and approvals until the completion of a comprehensive study). The Court noted that the judicial review application had been brought forward as a test case and saw no justification in requiring the proponent to repeat the EA process when there was no challenge to the substantive decisions made by the RAs. Therefore, the EA process and associated permits and approvals were allowed to stand.


The position adopted by the Supreme Court of Canada imposes a significant limitation on the RA's discretion to determine the scope of a project for the purposes of an EA under s.15 of the CEAA. Now the primary driver behind an RA's EA tracking decision will strictly be the project as proposed, with limited discretion to scope a project. This will likely result in proponents changing the manner in which they present their project proposals to RAs instead of relying on RAs to "scope to triggers." Practically speaking, this means that proponents will still conduct detailed EAs for their activities, but may only provide RAs with information on projects that come under their jurisdiction. Ironically, this may cause environmental groups to shift the focus of their litigation from project scoping to project-splitting.

The rejection of the "scoping to triggers" approach may extend the reach of federal EA into areas of provincial jurisdiction and subject activities to EA by both provincial and federal authorities. In MiningWatch, the Court was of the view that the problem of inefficient, costly and duplicative federal and provincial environmental assessments could be minimized by existing coordination mechanisms in the CEAA. However, experience has shown that this is not the case. The position taken by the Court also ignores the Constitutional division of powers issue which may lead to jurisdictional battles between federal and provincial authorities.

MiningWatch may also cause federal regulators to reconsider past EA tracking decisions to avoid judicial review by environmental groups. In MiningWatch, the Court did not believe it was necessary for the proponent to substantially re-do the EA as the Federal Court trial judge would have required. The Court recognized the proponent had done nothing wrong, had cooperated fully with the provincial EA process, and that there was no evidence of dissatisfaction with the environmental assessments themselves. This indicates that although screening level EAs may be subsequently bumped up to a comprehensive study EA (and potentially review panel EA), a proponent could argue that the comprehensive study requirements have already been satisfied by another process.

Implications for Proponents

Project proponents now need to strategically consider how they submit project proposals to regulators on a go-forward basis. Proponents may attempt to limit the scope of proposals to the powers, duties or functions of each regulator. While it may be appropriate to hive off approvals for projects ancillary to major projects, proponents will need to be cautious of project-splitting. In addition to this, proponents need to be aware of the prospect of increased duplication in the federal and provincial EA processes, as well as the potential Constitutional and jurisdictional issues that may be more likely to arise as a result of this decision.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions