The appellant brought an urgent motion to stay physical work on a renewable energy project pending its appeal of an Environmental Review Tribunal order.
The Tribunal had dismissed a similar motion, with reasons to follow.
The court applied the RJR-Macdonald test for interlocutory injunctions and found that without the Tribunal's reasons, it could not assess whether there was a serious issue to be tried.
The court also found no evidence of irreparable harm from the limited vegetation clearing proposed, and noted the balance of convenience favoured the respondent.
The motion for a stay was dismissed.
