519 672 2121
Close mobile menu
Showing 1041 - 1050 of 1595
Published on: 18 Sep 2012 By (Dianne Saxe)

Managing fill- an update

A knowledgeable reader brings us up to date ย about “Managing Fill: when is surplus soil a “waste”, and where can it go?” Hello Dianne, You have done an excellent job of briefly capturing the excess soil handling issues in Ontario including the high costs, the continuing regulatory confusion regarding surplus soils as a waste and...

Continue reading the post titled Managing fill- an update
Published on: 4 Jan 2016 By

A Year of Growth and Opportunity

As the new year enters with the promise of new beginnings, we wish to extend many thanks to our clients and readersย for making 2015 and excellent year. What a fabulous and exciting year for us. We were presented with many opportunities in 2015 including the transition of Saxe Law Office to Siskinds LLP with the...

Continue reading the post titled A Year of Growth and Opportunity
Published on: 15 Jan 2008 By (Dianne Saxe)

2007- Year in Review

Climate change, class actions, contaminated sites and water again dominated 2007 for environmental practitioners. The biggest international news was the increasing urgency of climate change. The release of the fourth report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change swept away any remaining doubt about the seriousness of the problem, or of the need for immediate...

Continue reading the post titled 2007- Year in Review
Published on: 5 Nov 2012 By (Dianne Saxe)

Fewer oil tanker spills in 2011

In 2011, oil tankers spilt less oil than ever before since records began, according to the excellentย International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation. There were only four medium sized spills and one large one, for a total of about 1,000 tonnes. Better ships (with double hulls), better equipment (such as GPS), better communications and better training have...

Continue reading the post titled Fewer oil tanker spills in 2011
Published on: 6 Mar 2008 By (Dianne Saxe)

More on the First Environmental Penalty

By digging behind the MOE press release we have discovered: The first environmental penalty was $9,000 for suspended solids escaping in storm water to a creek, contrary to the Ontario Water Resources Act. CGC Inc. had a long -standing problem with suspended solids from its gypsum storage pile, and had promised (in 2006) to keep...

Continue reading the post titled More on the First Environmental Penalty
Published on: 19 Oct 2011 By (Dianne Saxe)

Environmental causes of action

The recent Court of Appeal decision in Smith v Inco is requiring Canadian environmental lawyers to carefully rethink environmental causes of actionโ€“who can sue who for what? How can Smith v. Inco be reconciled with St. Lawrence Cement v. Barrette? (Different type of nuisance). Why can non-toxic airborne dust be the subject of a successful...

Continue reading the post titled Environmental causes of action