April 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 Constitution Act, 1867 (section 91 allocates legislative authority over certain matters to the federal government) and thus the federal government has legislative jurisdiction in respect of these populations. Here’s what the decision says, what it doesn’t say, and what it means.
Here’s what the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision said:
Federal government has legislative authority. The word “Indians” in section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867 can be equated with the term “aboriginal peoples of Canada”, and includes Métis and non-status Indians – and thus the federal government has legislative authority with respect to these populations (in fact the Crown conceded that non-status Indians are “Indians” under section 91(24), so the only issue the Court had to decide was whether Métis are).
It’s not necessary to further define the words. The Court acknowledged there is no consensus on the meaning of the words “Métis” and “non-status Indian”, but decided there doesn’t need to be one for purposes of determining which level of government has legislative authority. The Canadian Métis Council defines “Métis” as people of mixed European and Aboriginal blood; the Court noted that “Non-status Indians” are generally considered to be Aboriginal people who aren’t registered under the Indian Act or whom the federal government has never recognized as “Indians”. Whether specific people or communities are Métis or non-status Indians, and therefore included in the term “Indians” for the purposes of section 91(24), will be based on the facts and must be decided on a case-by-case basis. However, the Court did note that for the purposes of section 91(24), a person does not need to meet the three criteria for qualifying as a “Métis” person for the purposes of section 35 of the Charter that it developed in a 2003 decision: self-identification, ancestral connection to a historic community and acceptance by a modern community (R. v. Powley).
The Crown’s fiduciary duty to, and duty to consult, Aboriginal peoples – which includes Métis and non-status Indians – already exists. The Aboriginal groups had asked the Court to declare that the Crown owes a fiduciary duty to Métis and non-status Indians, or that they had the obligation to consult with them as Aboriginal peoples. The Court declined on the basis that courts have already recognized the Crown owes these duties, in a context-specific way, to Aboriginal peoples – which includes Métis and non-status Indians – and restating this would be redundant.
Here’s what it did not say:
Did not say word “Indians” always includes Métis and non-status Indians. This decision doesn’t mean the word “Indian” in the context of any agreement, whether private or public, necessarily includes Métis and/or non-status Indians, though it may have some relevance to the interpretation. The Court was clear that it was interpreting and defining the word “Indians” for the purpose of section 91(24) – and only for that purpose.
Did not say only the federal government can enact laws affecting Métis and non-status Indians. The Court was similarly clear that this decision doesn’t mean provincial laws respecting Métis and non-status Indians are automatically inapplicable, or that provinces can’t enact legislation that affects them. The general rules that permit provincial schemes that don’t impair the “core” of the federal “Indian” power still applies. While the Court didn’t, unfortunately, provide further clarification respecting when provincial legislation does impair the “core” of the federal Indian power, at the least, provincial legislation already declared inapplicable to “Indians” will now, by extension, be inapplicable to Métis and non-status Indians.
Did not say there’s any change in the duty to consult. The Crown’s fiduciary duty and the duty to consult flow from the rights of Aboriginal peoples under section 35 of the Charter; this decision deals with different Constitutional legislation. The Court pointed out this distinction and given section 35 expressly includes Métis it won’t likely broaden the scope of Aboriginal peoples to whom the Crown owes these obligations. The Court did, however, for the first time state one purpose of section 91(24) is “reconciliation”; whether this will affect the principles of consultation remains to be seen.
And here’s what it means:
Federal government pays for funding & programming. It’s clear the Court was aiming to eliminate the jurisdictional uncertainty over which level of government has authority over Métis and non-status Indians – historically denied by both federal and provincial governments – and end the resulting “significant and obvious disadvantaging consequences”. The immediate effect of clarifying that jurisdictional authority is less clear. The Court has certainly opened the door for the Federal government to take action. Undoubtedly Métis and non-status Indians will seek Federal government accountability for the gaps in funding, programming and services resulting from this long-standing uncertainty and negotiations will likely ensue. Self-identified Métis comprised 32.3% of Canada’s Aboriginal population and First Nations people who are not “Registered Indians” represented 25.1% of Canada’s First Nations population, according to a 2011 Stats Can report titled Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: First Nations People, Métis and Inuit.
A sympathetic court. Parties seeking to avoid obligations to Aboriginal peoples or to defend a failure to comply with them should proceed with caution. The Court’s attention to addressing wrongs and shortcomings vis a vis Aboriginal peoples is reaffirmed by its references to “inequities” in the relationship between Canada and its Indigenous peoples, the “remedies urgently sought” and the opportunities this case represents for the “pursuit of reconciliation and redress in that relationship” in the decision’s opening paragraph. This approach will likely continue to influence lower courts as well.
Please contact your McInnes Cooper lawyer or any member of our McInnes Cooper Aboriginal Law Team 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, 2016. 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.
Nov 1, 2023
On October 13, 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada issued its judicial reference opinion: a significant portion of Canada’s federal…
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…
Feb 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…
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 19, 2016
On December 14, 2016, Bill 46 and the Newfoundland and Labrador Public Procurement Act became law. The new Act isn’t yet in effect, however,…
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…
Dec 5, 2016
It’s been a long time coming, but Newfoundland and Labrador is finally getting new public procurement legislation. On November 29, 2016, Bill…
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…
Jul 5, 2016
The Ontario Court of Appeal has re-ignited the discussion about when a municipality will be held liable for its shoddy bylaw enforcement…
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 3, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada, in two related decisions, strengthened the legal protection of solicitor-client privilege in…
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 24, 2016
It’s now certain: in Newfoundland & Labrador, liens can’t be placed on Crown land or holdbacks with the possible exemption allowing for…
May 2, 2016
We updated this publication on October 4, 2023. Workplace accidents regularly lead to charges under occupational health and safety (OHS) law.…
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…
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 29, 2015
On July 27, 2015, the Federal Court of Canada decided a lawsuit by medical marijuana program participants against the Federal Government…
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 October 4, 2023. Most people know a company itself has occupational health and safety (OHS) obligations and…
Apr 15, 2015
On April 15, 2015 the Supreme Court of Canada decided the City of Saguenay’s recitation of a religious - though non-denominational – prayer…
Feb 2, 2015
On January 30, 2015 the Supreme Court of Canada decided that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom’s protection for freedom of…
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,…
May 26, 2014
On May 23, 2014 the Federal Court of Canada decided the Federal Treasury Board Secretariat’s interpretation of the policy for compensating…
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…
Jan 8, 2013
On November 19, 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) unanimously ruled a B.C. public school system’s failure to provide adequate and…
Subscribe to McInnes Cooper to stay current with our leading insights on legal updates, trends, news, events, and services.