Fluker, Shaun. Let’s Shine Some Light onto Creative Sentencing. Let’s Shine Some Light into Creative Environmental Sentencing |Posted on June 21, 2017 by Shaun Fluker … Case Commented On: R v Canadian National RailwayCompany sentencing order dated June 2, 2017 (ABPC).
Nwapi, Chinleye (2015) Environmental SentencingAlberta. This paper, Environmental Sentencing in Alberta, provides an excellent background and critique of the current situation. There is a detailed section on Creative Sentencing.
Ingelson, Allan 2014, CES-The Corporate Perspective. The full name of this paper, Creative Environmental Sentences – The Corporate Perspective, provides an important analysis.
Nelson, P. et al. (2014) Dead-Ducks-and-Dirty-Oil-Media-Representation-and-Environmental-Solutions This paper was funded by the R. vs. Syncrude creative sentence as part of the RAPP program at the University of Alberta.
Fluker, S. (2011), R vs Syncrude Birds and Bitumen, Alberta Law Review. this article discusses the case and its creative sentencing.
Chiasson, Cindy. 2014. cindy_chiasson-en 2014 Chiasson, Cindy, Environmental and Non Governmental Organizations and Creative Sentencing: Perspectives and Roles, presented to Symposium on Environment in the Courtroom, Feb. 21-22, 2014, Dalhousie University.
Cliffe, John D, Creative Sentencing in Environmental Prosecutions, The Canadian Experience- An Overview. This paper was prepared by John D. Cliffe, Q.C. of the Vancouver law firm of Cliffe Tobias for the Canadian Institute of Resources Law Symposium on Environmental Education for Judges and Court Practitioners, 21-22 February 2014, at Halifax.
Hughes, Elaine and Reynolds, Larry (2009) Creative Sentencing and Environmental Protection, in the Journal of Environmental Law and Practice, April 2009.
Nwapi, Chinlenye, 2012. Legal Responses to the Oil Sands. The full name of the paper is, Legal and Policy Responses in Response of the Alberta Oil Sands, Canadian Institute of Resources, Law, Calgary, Number 115-2012.
Appeal R vs. Centennial Zinc Plating Ltd. – Reasons for Judgment – February 20, 2004. The judge rejected the creative sentence and the Crown appealed.