Landmark casesLandmark Cases
Our lawyers have been involved in precedent setting cases, including:
- Williams Lake Indian Band v Canada (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development), 2018 SCC 4 – recognizing Canada’s responsibility for specific claims dealing with colonial breaches of obligation to protect Indian villages and settlements
- Gitxaala Nation v. Canada, 2016 FCA 187 – finding Canada to have breached its duty to consult First Nations in approving the Northern Gateway Pipelines Project
- Chartrand v British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations), 2015 BCCA 345 – clarifying the Crown’s obligations when engaged in deep consultations and that there is no reciprocal duty on Indigenous people to consult if the Crown offers inadequate consultation
- Interveners in Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia, 2014 SCC 44 – first declaration of Aboriginal title
- Interveners in Canada v. Kitselas First Nation, 2014 FCA 150 – first consideration of work of Specific Claims Tribunal
- Interveners in Lax Kw’alaams Indian Band v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 SCC 56 – Aboriginal right to fish commercially
- Interveners in Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. v. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, 2010 SCC 43 – outlining Crown’s consultation duties
- Interveners in R. v. Kapp, 2008 SCC 41 – interaction between section 25 Charter and section 35 Aboriginal rights
- Interveners in R. v. Sappier; R. v. Gray, 2006 SCC 54 – establishing the Aboriginal right to harvest timber on Crown land
- R. v. Morris, 2006 SCC 59 – establishing the Treaty right to night hunting and the role of Indigenous laws
- Musqueam Indian Band v. British Columbia (Minister of Sustainable Resource Management), 2005 BCCA 128 – defining and applying Crown’s duty to accommodate Aboriginal title
- Haida Nation et al. v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests) et al., 2004 SCC 73 – confirming the Crown’s duties of consultation and accommodation
- British Columbia (Minister of Forests) v. Okanagan Indian Band, 2003 SCC 71 – awarding advance costs for Aboriginal people to enable litigation of title and rights issues in the courts
- Osoyoos Indian Band v. Oliver (Town), 2001 SCC 85 – entrenching the Crown’s fiduciary obligations in relation to the taking of reserve lands
- Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010 – confirming that Aboriginal title has not been extinguished in British Columbia
- R. v. Gladstone, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 723 – first established Aboriginal right to fish commercially
- Blueberry River Indian Band v. Canada (Department of Indian Affairs), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 344 – a Treaty reserve case articulating the legal obligations of the Crown
- R. v. Sparrow, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1075 and R. v. Van der Peet, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 507 – determining that there is, under the Canadian Constitution, an existing Aboriginal right to fish
- Claxton v. Saanichton Marina (1989), 36 B.C.L.R. (2d) 79 (B.C.C.A.) – protecting Treaty fishing rights
- R. v. Jimmy (1987), 15 B.C.L.R. (2d) 145 (B.C.C.A.) – establishing that Band bylaws prevail over the federal Fisheries Act
- Pasco v. C.N.R. Co. (1985), 69 B.C.L.R. 76 – protecting the native fishery along the Fraser and Thompson rivers by obtaining an injunction preventing Canadian National Railway from double-tracking
- Guerin v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 335 – establishing the legal nature of the Crown’s fiduciary obligations to First Nations’ lands
- R. v. Bartleman, [1984] 55 B.C.L.R. 78 (B.C.C.A.) – protecting Treaty hunting rights