Helping understanding the Supreme Court's decision

While lawyers, analysts and journalists are depicting the Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia decision as "monumental," "landmark," "groundbreaking" and "historical," the active participants (developers, Aboriginal groups and government) are asking wha...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inCanadian Mining Journal Vol. 135; no. 7; p. 36
Main Authors Hutton, Linda, Duffy, Patrick
Format Trade Publication Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Don Mills Business Information Group 01.09.2014
Subjects
Consent
Impact analysis
Legislation
Mining industry
Native North Americans
Property rights
Supreme Court decisions
Treaties
Canada
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:While lawyers, analysts and journalists are depicting the Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia decision as "monumental," "landmark," "groundbreaking" and "historical," the active participants (developers, Aboriginal groups and government) are asking what it means and what does it change. The Supreme Court of Canada made a declaration of Aboriginal Title to the Tsilhqot'in First Nation over approximately 2,000 square km of Crown land in south-central British Columbia. This case does not directly apply to situations where an Aboriginal group has entered into a treaty. However, historic treaties, as compared with modern comprehensive treaties, have generally been more susceptible to challenges of enforceability. This article provides a summary overview of only some of the many questions and issues that this case raises, and each topic could easily bear further detailed analysis, especially as to how this ruling impacts specific projects and claims.
ISSN:0008-4492
1923-3418