Can Judicial Review Conclusively Determine the Existence of Aboriginal Rights?

Blog Post
November 27, 2017
Read Time: 3 minutes

The recent Supreme Court of Canada decision Ktunaxa Nation v British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations) related to the spiritual significance of a proposed development site. The applicants, the members of the Ktunaxa Nation, challenged a provincial minister’s decision to approve the project on the basis of both a section 35 duty to consult and the right to freedom of conscience and religion enshrined in section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Delegating the Duty, Minimising Responsibility?

Blog Post
August 16, 2017
Read Time: 3 minutes

Much has been written on the Supreme Court of Canada decisions in Clyde River (Hamlet) v Petroleum Geo-Services Inc. (“Clyde River”), and Chippewas of the Thames First Nation v Enbridge Pipelines Inc. (“Chippewas”) since they were released in late July 2017. In short, the decisions affirm the possibility that hearings and consultations conducted by the National Energy Board (the “NEB”) might satisfy the Crown’s constitutional duty to consult with Indigenous peoples.