Public environmental rights

However, the fact that the majority disallowed the claim in that case, on the basis of a defect in the pleadings and because there had not been an opportunity to hear submissions on the more "novel" implications of those rights, has resulted in a perception that the Court's comments were obiter. [...] Superficially, an action which appears to stress the plaintiff's concern for the public interest has obvious attractions for the litigant emphasizing the environmental perspective.11 However, the rules for standing in relation to public nuisance mean that in general only the Attorney General--or his or her designate---can bring a claim.12 In a modern era of environmental legislation, the governmen [...] For environmental legislation it may be argued that the purpose behind the legislation is actually to protect the same interests that have been traditionally addressed through the legal concept of public rights, and,consequently, that a broad and liberal interpretation of the legislation requires effect to be given to those rights, and efforts on the part of the executive, absent clear authorizati [...] The highest authority available is the Supreme Court's favourable comments on the American public trust doctrine in Canfor, followed by the observation that the Canadian law might recognize some sort of equivalent fiduciary obligations on the part of the Crown in respect of public rights: It seems to me that there is no legal barrier to the Crown suing for compensation as well as injunctive relief [...] These include the Crown's potential liability for inactivity in the face of threats to the environment, the existence or non-existence of enforceable fiduciary duties owed to the public by the Crown in that regard, the limits to the role and function and remedies available to governments taking action on account of activity harmful to public enjoyment of public resources, and the spectre of imposi