February 8, 2018
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:
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:
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.
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.
Aug 8, 2023
We updated this publication on August 10, 2023. The Nova Scotia commercial net-metering regime just took another step toward implementation.…
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…
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,…
Nov 10, 2022
We updated this publication on August 8, 2023. October 2022 amendments to the N.S. Renewable Electricity Regulations ushered in a new…
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)…
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…
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…
Feb 3, 2022
On January 26, 2022, the British Columbia Court of Appeal extended an injunction preventing protesters from interfering with a logging…
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…
Oct 29, 2021
The New Brunswick Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Regulation, effected under the N.B. Climate Change Act, establishes specific…
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…
Jul 27, 2021
Canadian entities regularly contract with foreign companies to provide services in Canada. To complete its obligations under the contract, the…
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…
Jun 1, 2021
We updated this publication on July 22, 2021. On May 26, 2021, the Hague District Court in the Netherlands ordered Royal Dutch Shell (RDS) to…
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…
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…
Jan 20, 2021
We updated this publication on July 8, 2022. 2020 was a year filled with challenges, including in the relationship between Indigenous…
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…
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.…
Nov 22, 2019
The Environmental Emergency Regulations, effected under section 200(1) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) and in force since…
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…
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…
Feb 20, 2018
The Canadian federal government has finally revealed how it proposes to regulate offshore renewable energy developments in federal waters. On…
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…
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…
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…
Nov 17, 2017
It’s official: as of October 31, 2017, “facilitation payments” contravene Canada’s Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act (CFPOA).…
Nov 9, 2017
On November 3, 2017, the Newfoundland and Labrador Government published new Offshore Oil Royalty Regulations replacing the Royalty Regulations,…
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…
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…
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…
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.…
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…
Jul 28, 2017
All stakeholders in any major project development already know that adequate consultation before - rather than after - a project is approved is…
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…
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…
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…
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…
Apr 20, 2017
On April 13, 2017, Canada’s federal government introduced legislation that, if passed into law, will legalize recreational cannabis 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…
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…
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…
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…
Jan 25, 2017
Doing business with the public sector creates an often overlooked – but very real – risk that the confidential information a business…
Jan 13, 2017
On January 11, 2017, Emera Inc. offered an electrifying opportunity for renewable energy developers to potentially access the New England…
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…
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…
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…
Nov 9, 2016
The balance between the public’s interest in accessing offshore petroleum resources data and operators’ commercial interests is at the heart…
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…
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…
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…
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…
Jun 10, 2016
Administrative monetary penalties, or “AMPs”, are a new phenomenon in the Canadian offshore. AMPs were introduced to the Newfoundland &…
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…
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…
May 2, 2016
We updated this publication on May 8, 2023. “Due diligence” is a legal defence to many charges under occupational health and safety (OHS)…
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…
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…
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…
Mar 9, 2016
On January 11, 2016, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice sentenced a front-line supervisor to imprisonment for 3½ years for four counts of…
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…
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…
Dec 21, 2015
A practical and current guide created to help you navigate the increasingly important issues surrounding offshore decommissioning and…
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…
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…
Jun 25, 2015
We updated this publication on May 9, 2023. Most people know a company itself has occupational health and safety (OHS) obligations and risks…
Dec 10, 2014
“Corporate Social Responsibility” (CSR) as a concept has been floating around in business-speak for years – but stakeholders in the mining…
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,…
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…
Subscribe to McInnes Cooper to stay current with our leading insights on legal updates, trends, news, events, and services.