Team Members ()

Publications ()

News ()

Pages ()

Services ()

  • Our Team

    Our Team

    • Lawyers & Clerks
    • Leadership Team
    • Board of Directors
    • Human Resources
    • Marketing & Business Development
    • Paraprofessional Services
  • Our Services

    Our Services

    • Service Areas
      • Aboriginal and Indigenous Law
      • Administrative Law
      • Agribusiness
      • Banking and Financial Services
      • Bankruptcy and Insolvency
      • Business Disputes
      • Business Immigration
      • Class Actions
      • Construction Law
      • Corporate and Business
      • Corporate Finance and Securities
      • Corporate Governance and Compliance
      • Cross-Border Law
      • Education Law
      • ESG (Environmental, Social, & Governance)
      • Estates and Trusts
      • Environmental Law
      • Foreign Direct Investment
      • Franchise Law
      • Health Law
      • Insurance
      • Intellectual Property
      • Labour and Employment
      • Litigation
      • Maritime Law
      • Media & Entertainment
      • Municipal Law
      • P3 and Infrastructure
      • Pensions and Benefits
      • Privacy, Data Protection and Cyber Security
      • Public Law
      • Real Estate
      • Regulation of Professions
      • SISIP LTD Allowances Class Action
      • Tax
      • Technology
      • View All
    • Industries
      • Cannabis
      • Construction & Property Development
      • Emerging & High Growth Companies
      • Energy & Natural Resources
      • Financial Services
      • Government & Institutions
      • Insurance
      • Manufacturing, Processing & Sales
      • Mining
      • Ocean Economy
      • Private Clients
      • Technology
      • View All
    • More Services
      • MC Advisory
      • MC Legal Lab
  • Our Insights
  • Our Firm

    Our Firm

    • Our Values
    • Our History
    • Our Representative Work
    • Our Global Reach
    • Our News
    • Diversity & Inclusion
    • Collective Social Responsibility
    • Pro Bono Program
  • Our Careers

    Our Careers

    • Lawyer Opportunities
    • Business Professional Opportunities
    • Paralegal & Legal Assistant Opportunities
    • Summer Student & Articling Opportunities
    • Diversity & Inclusion
    • Collective Social Responsibility
  • 1.866.439.6246
  • Contact
  • Search
  • Stay Updated
  • Contact Us
  • LexMundi World Ready
  • Privacy Policy
  • http://linkedin.com
  • http://facebook.com
  • http://twitter.com
  • 1.866.439.6246
Home > Our Insights > Williams Lake Indian Band v. Canada: Crown Breached Fiduciary Duty to Indigenous Community – in 1858
Publication

Williams Lake Indian Band v. Canada: Crown Breached Fiduciary Duty to Indigenous Community – in 1858

Published:

February 8, 2018

Author(s):

  • Harvey Morrison, KC

Share

Print

Over the past 15 years, most of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decisions respecting Indigenous Peoples in Canada have revolved around the Crown’s duty of consultation. The Crown, however, also owes Indigenous peoples another duty: a fiduciary duty. On February 2, 2018 the Supreme Court of Canada reviewed the elements of the Crown’s fiduciary duty to Indigenous Peoples in the context of a claim based on Crown conduct that occurred in the middle of the 19th century. In Williams Lake Indian Band v. Canada, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that in 1858, the Crown owed a fiduciary obligation to the Williams Lake Indian Band and breached that duty. The decision is a salutary reminder that governments cannot restrict their diligence to the existence of Aboriginal title or rights and the duty of consultation. They must also consider whether, in exercising discretionary powers under the law, they have fiduciary obligations to Indigenous peoples and if so, they are fulfilling that duty.

The Current Relevance

The Crown’s duty of consultation and its fiduciary duty to Indigenous peoples are two separate legal obligations. The fiduciary duty has some characteristics, such as good faith and full disclosure, that are also aspects of the duty of consultation. The two duties may even overlap. But they are not the same. There are three principal differences. First, the duty of consultation focuses primarily on process issues; the fiduciary duty is a more direct duty requiring the Crown to exercise its discretionary power to a legally prescribed standard of conduct. Second, there is also a specific beneficiary of the fiduciary duty, namely an Indigenous community with a specific or cognizable interest. Third, the consequences of breach are different. If the Crown fails to meet the fiduciary standard of conduct, a tribunal or court may set its decision aside, and the Crown may be obliged to pay compensation for its breach of the fiduciary duty. In contrast, if the Crown breaches the duty of consultation, the remedy is usually an order quashing an approval or permit.

Of what relevance today is a case on the Crown’s failure to discharge its fiduciary duty in the 19th century? A great deal: the existence and fulfilment of a fiduciary duty might affect how governments deal with project assessments and approvals:

  • If a project proponent must seek a governmental decision (such as by way of an assessment or approval in the form of a permit or license) to move forward with the project, that decision often entails the government’s exercise of discretionary power under the law.
  • If that exercise of a discretionary power under the law will affect a specific Aboriginal right, the governmental actor may be under a fiduciary duty to the relevant Indigenous community: a legal obligation to act in that Indigenous community’s best interest – not those of the government, the project proponent, or any other.
  • If a fiduciary duty exists, the governmental authority must exercise its discretionary control in accordance with the equitable standards that require loyalty, good faith and full disclosure in relation to that Indigenous community, and in its pursuit of their interests, must exercise the care of a person of ordinary prudence in managing their own affairs. And that duty might very well go far beyond the duty to consult.

One recent example of the impact of the Crown’s breach of fiduciary duty is the 2017 decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Coldwater Indian Band v. Canada (Indian and Northern Affairs) in which the Court set aside a decision of the Minister approving a transfer of an easement from one corporate subsidiary to another because the Crown breached its fiduciary obligation to the Coldwater Band. The Supreme Court of Canada’s February 2, 2018 decision in Williams Lake Indian Band v. Canada is another reminder of the continuing relevance of the Crown’s fiduciary duty.

The History

In 1858 when the colony of British Columbia was established, the Williams Lake Indian Band occupied Village Lands at the foot of Williams Lake. Governor Douglas provided assurances to the Band and others in the area that the Imperial Crown would survey their occupied village sites and reserve them for their benefit. Later the Crown issued a proclamation that permitted settlers to acquire “unoccupied and unreserved and un-surveyed Crown land” with certain exceptions, including “an Indian Reserve or settlement.” The settlers acquired lands by recording pre-emptions (a process that gave settlers the right to purchase public land). Notwithstanding the assurances given to the Band, the Village Lands were pre-empted, and government officials took no steps to call into question the pre-emptions recorded contrary to the proclamation and the legislation that subsequently effected it. The Band was therefore dispossessed from the Village Lands. The Band was later provided with a reserve on the other side of the Lake.

The Claim

Post 2008, the Band made a claim under the provisions of the Specific Claims Tribunal Act  alleging the Crown breached its legal obligation to protect the Band from being dispossessed of the Village Lands. The Specific Claims Tribunal decided the Band’s claim was well-founded: the Crown had breached its obligation to the Band by failing to prevent the Village Lands from being pre-empted and failing to challenge the pre-emptions that were unlawfully recorded. The Federal Court of Appeal overturned the Tribunal’s decision. The Tribunal appealed that decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Supreme Court of Canada’s Decision

The actual issue in the Supreme Court was whether the courts should review the Tribunal’s decision on the standard of correctness or of reasonableness. The Supreme Court decided the applicable standard was reasonableness. That would normally mean the Supreme Court accepted that the Tribunal’s decision fell within a range of reasonable conclusions. However, the way in which the Supreme Court analyzed the Tribunal’s reasoning makes it clear that the Court considered the Tribunal’s statement of the legal principles and its application of those principles to the facts were fundamentally correct. The Supreme Court addressed many issues in this case. Of particular interest, however, to project proponents in Canada is the Supreme Court’s treatment of the Crown’s fiduciary obligations to Indigenous peoples.

The Fiduciary Obligation. There are two ways in which a fiduciary obligation may arise between the Crown and Indigenous peoples:

  1. When the Crown has discretionary control over a specific or cognizable aboriginal interest, (the “sui generis fiduciary obligation”).
  1. Where the Crown has undertaken to exercise its discretionary control over a legal or substantial practical interest in the best interests of a beneficiary (the “ad hoc fiduciary relationship”).

Sui Generis Fiduciary Obligation. The majority of the Supreme Court confined its consideration to the sui generis fiduciary obligation, and did not address the question of the Crown’s ad hoc fiduciary obligation. The Crown, as a fiduciary, must exercise its discretionary control in accordance with the equitable standards that require loyalty, good faith and full disclosure. In its pursuit of the beneficiary’s interests, the fiduciary must exercise the care of a person of ordinary prudence in managing his or her own affairs. The sui generis fiduciary obligation in the Aboriginal law context exists in relation to a specific or cognizable Aboriginal interest. It was the identification of such interest that was a crucial issue in the Supreme Court.  There was no dispute that if the fiduciary obligation existed, the Crown was in breach of that obligation. The federal Crown argued that, prior to British Columbia’s entry into Confederation, the sui generis obligation had not existed.

  • As noted earlier under colonial law and policy “Indian settlements” were to be protected from pre-emption. The Supreme Court decided the Tribunal reasonably concluded the Village Lands would have qualified as an Indian settlement under the proclamation, and that colonial policy governing the implementation of the proclamation should have led to measures to prevent those Lands from being pre-empted by settlers.
  • The Crown contended its fiduciary obligation only arose when land had in fact, been provisionally set aside as a reserve, and not where land only “ought to have been set aside”. The Tribunal rejected this contention, reasoning that recognition of an Aboriginal interest in land under the then-prevailing law and policy governing reserve creation was sufficient to give rise to a “cognizable interest for the purpose of identifying the fiduciary duties of Crown officials carrying out their functions within that process”. The Supreme Court accepted this approach was reasonable so long as there was a sufficiently specific Aboriginal interest at stake in the early stages of the reserve creation process. The requisite specificity was present here because officials of the Crown ”would have been in a position to identify specific land in which Indigenous peoples had an interest”.
  • The Crown’s fiduciary duty to the Band was not “at large”; it was more specific. It related to the Band’s interest in the Village Lands. The Tribunal was required to consider the Crown’s acts and omissions in relation to the Village Lands, not in relation to other land or the Band’s best interest in general.

Discretionary Power. The second element of the test for the existence of a fiduciary duty was the existence of discretionary power on the part of the Village Lands. Crown officials’ knowledge of the Band’s interest in the Village Lands, coupled with the requirements of colonial law and policy to take steps to protect that interest, gave rise to a discretionary power on the part of the Crown officials in carrying out their functions in accordance with that law and policy.

Breach of the Fiduciary Duty. The Crown failed to meet its fiduciary obligation because the officials charged with protecting the Band’s interests failed to secure the interests of the Band in the Village Lands and improperly gave priority to the unlawful pre-emptions that led to the Band’s dispossession.


Please contact your McInnes Cooper lawyer or any member of the Aboriginal Law Team @ McInnes Cooper to discuss this topic or any other legal issue.


McInnes Cooper has prepared this document for information only; it is not intended to be legal advice. You should consult McInnes Cooper about your unique circumstances before acting on this information. McInnes Cooper excludes all liability for anything contained in this document and any use you make of it.

© McInnes Cooper, 2018. All rights reserved. McInnes Cooper owns the copyright in this document. You may reproduce and distribute this document in its entirety as long as you do not alter the form or the content and you give McInnes Cooper credit for it. You must obtain McInnes Cooper’s consent for any other form of reproduction or distribution. Email us at [email protected] to request our consent.

Share

Print
View Related Content

Related Lawyers

  • Harvey Morrison, QC

    Harvey Morrison, KC

    Partner

Related Services

  • Aboriginal and Indigenous Law

Related Industries

  • Energy & Natural Resources

Related Publications

View All Publications
  • Nova Scotia’s Green Hydrogen Sector: 3 Key Legislative Developments

    Jan 25, 2023

    Buzz around the potential of hydrogen as a green energy source has been growing. And the Atlantic Canadian provinces are poised to become a key…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Self-Determination Success: Indigenous Government Has Parliamentary Privilege

    Dec 6, 2022

    On September 22, 2022, the N.L. Supreme Court confirmed the Nunatsiavut Assembly is a legislative body that holds all privileges, immunities,…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Nova Scotia Ushers in a New Commercial Net-metering Regime

    Nov 10, 2022

    October 2022 amendments to the N.S. Renewable Electricity Regulations have ushered in a new commercial net-metering program in Nova Scotia.…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Court Rules in Favour of Non-Indigenous Interests in Lucrative Elver Fishery

    Jun 24, 2022

    The New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench has issued a court order to stop Indigenous fishers (all apparently members of the Wolastoqey Nation)…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Aquaculture Regulatory Decisions: The Critical Role of Industry Engagement

    Jun 6, 2022

    The Federal Court’s April 22, 2022 decision in Mowi Canada West Inc. v. Canada (Fisheries, Oceans and Coast Guard) has implications for the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Advance Costs: Indigenous Perspective Pivotal in “Pressing Needs” Analysis

    Mar 31, 2022

    On March 18, 2022, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed that an Indigenous government can still satisfy the impecuniosity requirement for an…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Appeal Court Confirms Key Role of Courts & Injunctions to Resolve Disputes

    Feb 3, 2022

    On January 26, 2022, the British Columbia Court of Appeal extended an injunction preventing protesters from interfering with a logging…

    Read More
    Publication
  • NS Environmental Goals & Climate Change Reduction Act: In Pursuit of Sustainable Prosperity

    Nov 10, 2021

    On November 5, 2021, the Province of Nova Scotia passed the Environmental Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act. The Act will serve as the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • NB Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reduction Regulation: 5 Key Obligations

    Oct 29, 2021

    The New Brunswick Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Regulation, effected under the N.B. Climate Change Act, establishes specific…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Webinar | Growing Out Atlantic Canada’s Aquaculture Industry

    Oct 19, 2021

    Canada’s aquaculture industry is poised for growth but that growth is being challenged by regulatory uncertainty and a lack of confidence…

    Read More
    Webinar
  • Hiring a Foreign Company to Provide Services in Canada? 3 Immigration Issues

    Jul 27, 2021

    Canadian entities regularly contract with foreign companies to provide services in Canada. To complete its obligations under the contract, the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Duty to Consult Indigenous Groups: 5 FAQs

    Jun 21, 2021

    There is a duty to consult Indigenous groups when the Crown contemplates actions that may adversely affect their rights under section 35 of the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Dutch Court Orders Corporation to Reduce Emissions in Landmark Decision

    Jun 1, 2021

    This publication has been updated as at July 22, 2021. On May 26, 2021, the Hague District Court in the Netherlands ordered Royal Dutch Shell…

    Read More
    Publication
  • R. v. Desautel: Canadian Constitution Protects Non-Citizen Aboriginal People

    May 10, 2021

    The Supreme Court of Canada continues to expand the scope of Aboriginal rights. On April 23, 2021, in R. v. Desautel, for the first time the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The N.S. Shared Solar Energy Program: 3 Key Facts

    Apr 13, 2021

    On April 7, 2021, the Nova Scotia government introduced Bill 97, amendments to the N.S. Electricity Act aimed at growing the solar industry in…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Indigenous Right to a Moderate Livelihood: A Need for Clarity

    Jan 20, 2021

    This publication has been updated as at July 8, 2022. 2020 was a year filled with challenges, including in the relationship between…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Coping with COVID-19: The Impact on Contractual Performance in the Energy & Natural Resources Sector

    Apr 20, 2020

    As countries around the world grapple with the spread of COVID-19, global restrictions and containment measures have presented a range of…

    Read More
    Publication
  • N.S. Battens Down Marine Renewable Energy Power Purchase Agreement (PPA)

    Feb 4, 2020

    Tidal developers considering responding to the FORCE Berth D procurement now have a clearer view of just what the successful proponent will get.…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 5 Key Requirements of Canada’s Federal Environmental Emergency Regulations

    Nov 22, 2019

    The Environmental Emergency Regulations, effected under section 200(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) and in force since…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Dan Watt in Energy Regulation Quarterly | The Impact Assessment Act, Canadian Energy Regulator Act and Offshore Energy: A View from Atlantic Canada

    Jul 10, 2018

    If enacted, Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Evolving Duty to Consult Indigenous Peoples: N.S. Court Recognizes a “Duty of Enforcement Consultation” in R. v. Martin

    Jun 29, 2018

    The Crown’s duty to consult Indigenous Peoples has evolved considerably since the Supreme Court of Canada’s first detailed articulation of…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Bill C-69 & The New Federal Offshore Renewable Energy Regime

    Feb 20, 2018

    The Canadian federal government has finally revealed how it proposes to regulate offshore renewable energy developments in federal waters. On…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Bill C-69 & the New Federal Impact Assessment Act: The Impact on the Role of the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board (CNSOPB) and the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (CNLOPB)

    Feb 20, 2018

    On February 8, 2018, the Canadian federal government proposed a new Impact Assessment Act in Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Navigating the N.S. Marine Renewable Energy Regime: What Project Developers Need to Know

    Feb 13, 2018

    The much-anticipated Nova Scotia marine renewable energy regime finally has the force of law.  First introduced over two years ago, the Nova…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Balance Between Public & Operator Interests in Offshore Petroleum Resources Data is Set

    Nov 30, 2017

    On November 30, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada denied Geophysical Service Incorporated’s (GSI) application for leave to appeal the decision…

    Read More
    Publication
  • “Facilitation Payments” to Foreign Public Officials Violates Canada’s Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act

    Nov 17, 2017

    It’s official: as of October 31, 2017, “facilitation payments” contravene Canada’s Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act (CFPOA).…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Newfoundland & Labrador Offshore Oil Royalty Regulations November 1, 2017: Key Changes to the Offshore Regime

    Nov 9, 2017

    On November 3, 2017, the Newfoundland and Labrador Government published new Offshore Oil Royalty Regulations replacing the Royalty Regulations,…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Supreme Court of Canada Tackles Freedom of Religion & the Duty to Consult in Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations)

    Nov 7, 2017

    On November 2, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada was faced with the Ktunaxa Nation’s claim that a Ministerial decision to approve a project…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Canada Has Other Fish to Fry Between NAFTA Negotiation Rounds: CETA Provisionally Effective September 21, 2017

    Oct 11, 2017

    The fourth round of NAFTA negotiations is set to start on October 11, 2017. But in the meantime, the Canada-European Union Comprehensive…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Proposed N.S. Marine Renewable Energy Act Amendments: New Demonstration Permit for Marine Renewable Energy in Wind & Waves

    Oct 6, 2017

    On October 5, 2017, the N.S. government took another step toward creating a globally competitive marine renewable energy industry and associated…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Charting a Course for Good Governance of Canada’s Emerging Ocean Economy | Offshore Aquaculture and Ocean-based Renewable Energy

    Sep 29, 2017

    Atlantic Canada is at a turning point. The region’s history and economic development have historically been inextricably linked to the ocean.…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 5 Anti-Corruption Law Compliance Program Tips

    Aug 16, 2017

    In the not-so-distant past, Canadian enforcement of its anti-corruption and anti-bribery legal regime has been relatively laid-back. But the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Crown Can Rely on National Energy Board to Fulfill its Duty to Consult

    Jul 28, 2017

    All stakeholders in any major project development already know that adequate consultation before - rather than after - a project is approved is…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Making Waves: What CETA means for Atlantic Canadian Fisheries

    Jul 11, 2017

    The Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) is making waves in Canada, and for good reason: it casts the net of…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Canada v. Mikisew Cree First Nation: Court to Decide Whether Duty to Consult Also Applies Before Legislation is Enacted

    May 26, 2017

    On May 19, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear the appeal of the Federal Court of Appeal’s 2016 decision in Canada v Mikisew Cree…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Anti-Corruption Law Exposes Payments to Governments Under Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act

    May 11, 2017

    The Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act is one of several anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws aimed at fighting corruption in the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Appeal Court Maintains Balance Between Public & Operator Interests in Offshore Petroleum Resources Data

    May 1, 2017

    NOTE: On November 30, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada denied Geophysical Service Incorporated’s (GSI) application for leave to appeal the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Cannabis Legalization in Canada: Seeds have sprouted, but the branches are still bare

    Apr 20, 2017

    On April 13, 2017, Canada’s federal government introduced legislation that, if passed into law, will legalize recreational cannabis in Canada.…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Nip it in the Bud: A 5 Step Plan for Employers to Prepare for Cannabis Legalization in Canada

    Apr 17, 2017

    Recreational cannabis isn’t legal yet - but much of the associated stigma is already gone, usage is up and employers are feeling the workplace…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Daniel Watt and Sara Mahaney in Gard Update: Legal privilege in the corporate context in Canada

    Apr 6, 2017

    Adding a third jurisdiction to Gard Update’s comparison between privilege in the corporate context under U.S. and English law, McInnes Cooper…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Register Before You Lobby in N.B. under Lobbyists’ Registration Act

    Apr 5, 2017

    NOTE: Consultants who were already lobbying and in-house lobbyists already employed by an organization when the new Act took effect were…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Go Deep: How International Legal Reform Can Prevent Legal Uncertainty from Hindering Offshore Wind & Aquaculture Growth

    Mar 31, 2017

    Legal uncertainty is never a good thing for industry: it’s a barrier to investment, and thus an adversary to growth. Unfortunately, the law is…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Confidentiality Risks of Doing Business With the Public Sector Just Got Riskier: Completed NS Access to Information Requests Go Online

    Jan 25, 2017

    Doing business with the public sector creates an often overlooked – but very real – risk that the confidential information a business…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Atlantic Link: 5 Key Questions About the Electrifying Opportunity to Connect to a New Renewable Energy Market

    Jan 13, 2017

    On January 11, 2017, Emera Inc. offered an electrifying opportunity for renewable energy developers to potentially access the New England…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Top Three Atlantic Canada Offshore Legal Developments of 2016

    Dec 20, 2016

    As 2016 draws to a close, Oil & Gas Team @ McInnes Cooper offers its picks for the top three legal developments of 2016 that impacted the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Time to Shine: Nova Scotia to Launch Solar Energy Pilot Program in 2017

    Dec 15, 2016

    On December 13, 2016, the Province of Nova Scotia released for comment draft regulations that will establish the Solar for Community Buildings…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 10 Steps to Anticipate Citizens’ Challenges to New Developments

    Dec 7, 2016

    Recently, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court denied a motion for a temporary stay of proceedings to prevent the deployment of certain tidal devices…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Public & operator interests in offshore petroleum resources data: Where will the balance be struck? in Geophysical Service Incorporated (GSI) v. Encana Corporation

    Nov 9, 2016

    The balance between the public’s interest in accessing offshore petroleum resources data and operators’ commercial interests is at the heart…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Supreme Court of Canada Decides Indian Bands Assessing Leased Reserve Lands for Property Tax Purposes Can’t Have it Both Ways in Musqueam Indian Band v. Musqueam Indian Band (Board of Review)

    Sep 12, 2016

    On September 9, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided in Musqueam Indian Band v. Musqueam Indian Band (Board of Review) that an Indian band…

    Read More
    Publication
  • DFO Decides “Last In, First Out” Policy (LIFO) is Out

    Jul 7, 2016

    On July 6, 2016, the Federal Department of Fisheries and Ocean’s (DFO) accepted the Ministerial Advisory Panel (MAP) recommendation in the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Weigh Now or Weight Later: New Cargo Container Verified Gross Mass (VGM) Rules Effective July 1, 2016

    Jun 20, 2016

    As of July 1, 2016, packed cargo containers to which the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), Chapter VI, Regulation…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Parameters of Municipal Power: Supreme Court of Canada Decides Municipality Can’t Block Radiocommunication Tower Construction

    Jun 17, 2016

    In its June 16, 2016 decision in Rogers Communications Inc. v. Châteauguay (City), the Supreme Court of Canada decided a municipality’s…

    Read More
    Publication
  • FAQs About AMPs (Administrative Monetary Penalties) in the Canadian Offshore

    Jun 10, 2016

    Administrative monetary penalties, or “AMPs”, are a new phenomenon in the Canadian offshore. AMPs were introduced to the Newfoundland &…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Assertion of Aboriginal Right Does Not Automatically Confer Eligibility to Appeal a Regulatory Approval

    Jun 6, 2016

    On June 2, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada denied an Alberta First Nation’s request to appeal the Court of Appeal’s dismissal of its bid…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The East Coast Duty to Consult Indigenous Peoples

    Jun 6, 2016

    Each Provincial government is under the legal duty to consult; the manner in which each carries out its legal duty to consult differs depending…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Legal Defence of Due Diligence: Top 5 FAQs

    May 2, 2016

    “Due diligence” is a legal defence to many charges under occupational health and safety (OHS) laws. Here are five of the most…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The New Nova Scotia Mineral Resources Act: The Good, The Risky & The Neutral

    Apr 21, 2016

    On April 15, 2016, Bill No. 149, The Mineral Resources Act (2016) (2016 Act), passed its second reading in the NS House of Assembly. Although…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Supreme Court of Canada Decides Federal Government Has Legislative Authority Over Métis & Non-Status Indians

    Apr 19, 2016

    On April 14, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided that Métis and “non-status Indians” are “Indians” under section 91(24) of the…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Doing Business With the Public Sector: Key Confidentiality Risks & 3 Risk Management Strategies

    Mar 24, 2016

    When a business responds to a public sector Request for Proposal or Expression of Interest (both of which we’ll refer to as an RFP for these…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Construction Project Manager Sentenced to 3½ Years for Workplace Accident in R. v. Vadim Kazenelson (aka “Metron”)

    Mar 9, 2016

    In what appears to be the first case of the conviction of a front line supervisor under section 217.1 of the Criminal Code and sentencing to a…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Energy Safety and Security Act (ESSA): 7 Key Changes Toughen Up Atlantic Offshore and North Oil & Gas Regulatory Regime

    Feb 15, 2016

    On February 26, 2016, the bulk of the offshore-related amendments of the Energy Safety and Security Act (ESSA, formerly known as Bill C-22) take…

    Read More
    Publication
  • NB Kicks-off First Request for Expressions of Interest from Aboriginal Businesses Under New Electricity from Renewable Resources Regulation

    Feb 1, 2016

    On January 29, 2016, the New Brunswick Power Corporation (NB Power) kicked-off compliance with its obligations under the new Electricity from…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Offshore Oil and Gas Decommissioning Best Practices

    Dec 21, 2015

    A practical and current guide created to help you navigate the increasingly important issues surrounding offshore decommissioning and…

    Read More
    Publication
  • The Changing Face of Aboriginal Law: 1 Short Year, 2 Big Court Decisions, 3 Key Implications for the Energy & Natural Resources Sector

    Jul 17, 2015

    On the heels of National Aboriginal Day, we pause to take a look back at two significant Aboriginal law cases decided in the last year, how…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Unproven Aboriginal Rights Enough For Lawsuit Against Private Industry

    Jul 10, 2015

    On April 15, 2015, British Columbia’s Court of Appeal confirmed that First Nations can make certain legal claims grounded in Aboriginal rights…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 3 Reasons for Directors, Officers and Supervisors To Take Occupational Health and Safety Personally

    Jun 25, 2015

    Most people know that a company itself has OHS obligations, and that it risks corporate liability if it violates those obligations. However, not…

    Read More
    Publication
  • 5 “Legal” Reasons Why Natural Resource Companies Should Care About Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

    Dec 10, 2014

    “Corporate Social Responsibility” (CSR) as a concept has been floating around in business-speak for years – but stakeholders in the mining…

    Read More
    Publication
  • SCC Sets Test for – and Defines Rights of – Aboriginal Title in Canada

    Jun 26, 2014

    On June 26, 2014, in its groundbreaking decision on Aboriginal title in Read the SCC’s decision in Tsilhqot’in Nation v. B.C., 2014 SCC 44,…

    Read More
    Publication
  • Legal Update: The Duty to Consult – Important Lessons from Canada’s Mining Sector

    Mar 15, 2013

    Recent developments in Ontario and Yukon are an important reminder of the practical implications of the Crown’s legal Duty to Consult with…

    Read More
    Publication

Stay Updated

Subscribe to McInnes Cooper to stay current with our leading insights on legal updates, trends, news, events, and services.

Connect With Us:
  • Follow us on Twitter @mcinnescooper
  • Like us on Facebook @mcinnescooperlaw
  • Join us on LinkedIn @mcinnes-cooper
  • 1.866.439.6246
  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright © 2023 — McInnes Cooper
Lex Mundi Logo MC Advisory Logo