SASKATOON — The Saskatchewan Environmental Society (SES) and four co-applicants have filed a notice of appeal with the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, seeking to revive their legal challenge of the provincial government’s plan to continue operating coal-fired power plants beyond the federal phase-out deadline.
The appeal follows a Jan. 12 decision of the Court of King’s Bench, which dismissed the case on procedural grounds. The lower court ruled that the province’s June 2025 decision to extend coal-fired power generation amounted to government policy and not subject to judicial review.
“The Court of King’s Bench dismissed the case without allowing the full legal arguments to be heard,” said Margret Asmuss, SES President. “We are asking the Court of Appeal to allow the case to proceed to a full hearing.”
The groups argue that Saskatchewan’s decision isn’t a policy decision but involves administrative actions, including plans to spend almost one billion dollars retrofitting aging coal-fired power stations with the explicit intention of operating them well beyond Dec. 31, 2029 — the date by which federal law requires all conventional coal-fired power plants in Canada to cease operations. The Saskatchewan government has further indicated that these retrofitted plants are intended to operate into the 2040s.
“SES believes this is precisely the kind of administrative decision that should concern the courts, whose role is to uphold the rule of law and intervene when a provincial government signals an intention to defy federal law,” said Peter Prebble, SES board member. "Our court case involves one of the most significant climate change decisions in Canada, because coal is the most polluting form of electricity generation, and because Saskatchewan currently accounts for a stunning 24 per cent of the greenhouse gas pollution associated with electricity generation In Canada. Curbing that pollution is urgent.”
SES Vice-President Bob Halliday said Saskatchewan is the only province planning to extend coal use.
“Every other province has already phased out coal or committed to doing so by 2030,” he said.
The applicants argue that prolonging coal-fired power will lock in higher emissions, worsen health and climate risks, and saddle residents with long-term costs tied to infrastructure that could become stranded.
SES board member Elaine Wheaton said public funds would be better directed toward “clean, reliable, and more affordable renewable energy solutions.”
