Talk:British Columbia Energy Regulator
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Wuerzele in topic Request assistance with updated court case ruling
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Request assistance with updated court case ruling
edit | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The request was not specific enough. You may consider leaving your comments on the Talk page or escalating significant issues to the conflict of interest noticeboard. |
On Oct. 10, 2014, the Supreme Court of British Columbia ruled: "I conclude that the interpretation that successive or recurrent approvals may be granted is reasonable and, in any event, correct. The petition is dismissed." [1]
- ^ "Western Canada Wilderness Committee v. British Columbia (Oil and Gas Commission), 2014 BCSC 1919". Retrieved 22 January 2015.
Wrightwords (talk) 23:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Not done Not clear what it is you want doing here. Please provide in a Change X to Y format. Amortias (T)(C) 22:15, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Done I already inserted the Supreme Court ruling in this edit, Amortias. I also asked Wrightwords for a photo we can use for the page, but no reply...--Wuerzele (talk) 02:00, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
