Vive Le Canada

Oil & Gas Co's Win -Land Owners Lose

Posted on Monday, July 19 at 13:30 by whelan costen
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled Friday, in a unanimous decision, that companies can keep a share of the natural gas extracted from land along the Canadian Pacific Railway. "This has been a dispute that's been festering for about 20 years," Lenard Sali, the lawyer representing BP Amoco Canadam said, adding that hundreds of millions of dollars were at stake. http://www.mytelus.com/news/article.do?pageID=cbc/calgary_home&articleID=1665183

Contributed By


Topic


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. by Jim Callaghan
    Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:29 am
    Another slap in the face to landowners.

    Imagine, saying that natural gas in a liquid form is the same as oil, and the landowner, who is entitled to the natural gas in a gaseous state, has been swindled again.

    Some laws we have in this country.

    Corporations RULE !! No Doubt About It !

    Colour me Purple !



    ---
    "Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
    Jim Callaghan
    Minden, Ontario
    705-286-1860
    www.misterc.ca

  2. by avatar whelan costen
    Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:37 am
    Yes Jim, I too was astounded by this decision, how can any of our public servants really be seen as fair?

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  3. by Perturbed
    Tue Jul 20, 2004 2:33 am
    They're not fair. What I think should be empahsized on a Candian sovereignty site, however, is that we should be thrilled that we could have another 5 decades of a different variant of natural gas. Natural gas isn't that bad for the environment, (at least air quality) except for the extraction. This gives us more time to develop new methods of propelling cars and heating homes, if we could only get out of NAFTA and ensure our sovereignty over this gas, and over our research and development.

  4. by hoopoe
    Tue Jul 20, 2004 3:27 pm
    What has getting five decades more of gas out of the ground (these numbers are always grossly exaggerated by the way) have to do with ensuring Canadian sovereignty when five of the six companies named in the article are foreign owned.

    The whole point here is that the Supreme Court sided with these oil companies when clearly the intent of the initial agreement was that what came out of the ground as a gas belonged to the land owners. I mean, why mention gas at all in the agreement if it doesn't exist as a gas underground? I think any lawyer who could not make a case for the landowners on this point alone should be disbarred.

  5. by Perturbed
    Tue Jul 20, 2004 3:57 pm
    Like I said, get out of NAFTA, and solve te problem of foreign ownership.



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.



Latest Editorials

more articles »

Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

sitemap | feeds | privacy | copyright | contact
canadian bloggers | canadian news