A Gitxsan hereditary chief and several environmental groups are asking the British Columbia Supreme Court to throw out a provincial decision that kept a long-delayed, $12-billion natural gas pipeline alive. The 750-kilometre pipeline, backed by the Nisga'a Nation, is intended to supply the proposed Ksi Lisims liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility, a floating export terminal north of Prince Rupert.
Background of the Dispute
The pipeline's environmental approval certificate was extended for five years in 2019, with a requirement that the project be "substantially started"—moving beyond planning into actual development such as land clearing—by November 2024. In June 2025, the province announced that the pipeline had met that threshold, a decision now under legal scrutiny.
If the environmental certificate had been lost, the project would have required a completely new environmental review, posing a major obstacle for the $10-billion Ksi Lisims LNG project. That facility, added to Canada's major projects fast-track list in November 2024, would super-cool natural gas from northeastern B.C. for shipment to Asian markets.
Legal Challenges
Two weeks of hearings began Monday in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver, addressing separate but concurrent challenges from Gitxsan hereditary chief Charlie Wright and environmental groups including the Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition and the Kispiox Valley Community Centre Association.
Wright, hereditary chief of the Luutkudziiwus house group, argues that the pipeline would cross more than 34 kilometres of his territory, including untouched wilderness used for culture, identity, and livelihood. He stated, "The province's decision will compromise our rights, title and the use of our lands—and we're prepared to take this issue to the Supreme Court of Canada."
In court filings, the province, the Nisga'a Nation, and the pipeline company reject claims that the project was not substantially started or that the Luutkudziiwus were not properly consulted. They argue the determination was made correctly and that adequate consultation occurred.
Wright's petition also challenges a benefits agreement signed on behalf of the Luutkudziiwus by Gordon Sebastian, who also claims to be hereditary chief of the same house group. Wright asserts the agreement was improper.
The outcome of these hearings could significantly impact the future of the pipeline and the associated LNG project, which has drawn both support from some Indigenous groups and opposition from others concerned about environmental and cultural impacts.
