CONTINGENCIES	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
CONTINGENCIES
CONTINGENCIES	NOTE 15CONTINGENCIES Great Lakes v. Essar Steel Minnesota LLC, et al. – On October 29, 2009, Great Lakes filed suit in the U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, against Essar Minnesota LLC and certain Essar affiliates (collectively, Essar) for breach of its monthly payment obligation under its transportation services agreement with Great Lakes. Great Lakes sought to recover approximately $33 million for past and future payments due under the agreement. On September 16, 2015, following a jury trial, the federal district court judge entered a judgment in the amount of $32.9 million in favor of Great Lakes. On September 20, 2015, Essar appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit (8th Circuit) based on an allegation of improper jurisdiction and a number of other rulings by the federal district judge. Essar was required to post a performance bond for the full value of the judgment pending appeal. Essar filed its brief in April 2016 and Great Lakes’ brief is due May 18th, 2016. The court will set a hearing date after it received the briefings. The matter is expected to be heard in 2016. Employees Retirement System of the City of St. Louis v. TC PipeLines GP, Inc., et al. – On October 13, 2015, an alleged unitholder of the Partnership filed a class action and derivative complaint in the Delaware Court of Chancery (Chancery Court) against the General Partner, TransCanada American Investments, Ltd. (TAIL) and TransCanada, and the Partnership as a nominal defendant. The complaint alleges direct and derivative claims for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, aiding and abetting breach of contract, and tortious interference in connection with the 2015 GTN Acquisition, including the issuance by the Partnership of $95 million in Class B Units and amendments to the Partnership Agreement to provide for the issuance of the Class B Units. Plaintiff seeks, among other things, to enjoin future issuances of Class B Units to TransCanada or any of its subsidiaries, disgorgement of certain distributions to the General Partner, TransCanada and any related entities, return of some or all of the Class B Units to the Partnership, rescission of the amendments to the Partnership Agreement, monetary damages and attorney fees. To the extent the claims are derivative, the Partnership would be the beneficiary of any monetary award. The Partnership does not expect legal fees or the impact of the decision on plaintiffs’ other requests to be material. In April 2016, the Chancery Court held a hearing on the Partnership and other defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint. A decision on the motion is expected in late second quarter of 2016 or early third quarter 2016.

CONTINGENCIES

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2016

NOTE 15CONTINGENCIES

Great Lakes v. Essar Steel Minnesota LLC, et al. – On October 29, 2009, Great Lakes filed suit in the U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, against Essar Minnesota LLC and certain Essar affiliates (collectively, Essar) for breach of its monthly payment obligation under its transportation services agreement with Great Lakes. Great Lakes sought to recover approximately $33 million for past and future payments due under the agreement. On September 16, 2015, following a jury trial, the federal district court judge entered a judgment in the amount of $32.9 million in favor of Great Lakes. On September 20, 2015, Essar appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit (8th Circuit) based on an allegation of improper jurisdiction and a number of other rulings by the federal district judge. Essar was required to post a performance bond for the full value of the judgment pending appeal. Essar filed its brief in April 2016 and Great Lakes’ brief is due May 18th, 2016. The court will set a hearing date after it received the briefings. The matter is expected to be heard in 2016.

Employees Retirement System of the City of St. Louis v. TC PipeLines GP, Inc., et al. – On October 13, 2015, an alleged unitholder of the Partnership filed a class action and derivative complaint in the Delaware Court of Chancery (Chancery Court) against the General Partner, TransCanada American Investments, Ltd. (TAIL) and TransCanada, and the Partnership as a nominal defendant. The complaint alleges direct and derivative claims for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, aiding and abetting breach of contract, and tortious interference in connection with the 2015 GTN Acquisition, including the issuance by the Partnership of $95 million in Class B Units and amendments to the Partnership Agreement to provide for the issuance of the Class B Units. Plaintiff seeks, among other things, to enjoin future issuances of Class B Units to TransCanada or any of its subsidiaries, disgorgement of certain distributions to the General Partner, TransCanada and any related entities, return of some or all of the Class B Units to the Partnership, rescission of the amendments to the Partnership Agreement, monetary damages and attorney fees. To the extent the claims are derivative, the Partnership would be the beneficiary of any monetary award. The Partnership does not expect legal fees or the impact of the decision on plaintiffs’ other requests to be material. In April 2016, the Chancery Court held a hearing on the Partnership and other defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint. A decision on the motion is expected in late second quarter of 2016 or early third quarter 2016.