Sentences with phrase «aboriginal rights claims»

The court suggested that legal and economic uncertainty could result if a regulatory approval process could be later «hijacked» by aboriginal rights claims.

Consultation Update: Emerging & Persistent Issues Using Haida Nation v British Columbia's vision of the duty to consult as existing along - side the negotiation process (aiming at a more fulsome settlement of aboriginal rights claims), this paper first provides an overview of the duty to consult and the state of the law.

Not exact matches

Neither is there any mention of the rights of aboriginal communities with claims to the land in question.

So far as Derek understood it, the site should have been cleaned up years ago but it had got mired in political horse - trading until, about a decade ago, Charlie Salliaq had dismissed the old legal team and called on the services of Sonia Gutierrez, a prominent human rights lawyer specializing in aboriginal land claims.

Standards like this one ensure adequate quantification and proper ownership rights, particularly in relation to aboriginal land claims.

Haida Nation has claimed aboriginal rights and title over Haida Gwaii, and its claim includes «the land, inland waters, seabed, archipelagic waters, air space, and everything contained thereon and therein,» thus including private lands and Crown grants of tenures, permits, and leases.

Sovereignty, self - government, aboriginal title that has not been ceded, unresolved specific claims, legislative authorities, human rights and institutional racism are just a few of the topics, which, raised in the wrong context, can side track the discussion and the consultation.

In Monture v. Director, MOE (Monture 1), [v] a Six Nations appellant tried to use the same issues plus aboriginal rights and claims to block the Summerhaven wind project REA.

For a claims to succeed, however, First Nations must still prove the aboriginal rights or title (or other property rights) that for the basis of the claim.

They claim aboriginal rights and title to the Nechako River and its banks as well as other property interests.

Currently, most claims of aboriginal rights and titles brought to the courts are through a representative action where one member of the group becomes the representative plaintiff for the remainder of the group, making it easier to represent all the members of an entity.

They claimed that the aboriginal rights that were not yet recognized or established could not create civil liability on the part of third parties.

Beyond merely acknowledging the existence of the Mi» kmaq treaty right to a «limited» commercial fishery, the Marshall decision reaffirms a commitment by the Court, articulated previously in cases such as Sparrow, Van der Peet, Badger and Delgamuukw, to look to the aboriginal perspective when interpreting historically based claims by a First Nation against the Crown.

The central principle laid down was, «to be an aboriginal right, an activity must be an element of a practice, custom or tradition integral to the distinctive culture of the aboriginal group claiming the right.»

Like Sparrow, the decision in R. v. Van der Peet, addressed the appellant's claim to an aboriginal right to fish.

What of the Chief Justice's caution in Van der Peet: «Courts considering a claim to the existence of an aboriginal right must focus specifically on the practices, customs and traditions of the particular aboriginal group claiming the right»?

Assisted an aboriginal community with assessing and preparing an aboriginal fishing rights claim.

One is the 2008 repeal of s. 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which prevented aboriginals on reserves from pursuing certain types of human rights claims against the federal goverRights Act, which prevented aboriginals on reserves from pursuing certain types of human rights claims against the federal goverrights claims against the federal government.

Admittedly, progress is slow in resolving aboriginal claims, but the reality is that the courts are the only institution with the respect necessary to decide the major issues in aboriginal rights and title claims.

Lawyers specializing in both mining and aboriginal law expect a raft of new cases to test the limits of aboriginal title in the wake of the Supreme Court of Canada's June 26 Tsilhqot» in Nation v. British Columbia ruling — the Tahltan First Nations in northern British Columbia jumped right in with a title claim that it launched hours after Tsilhqot» in came in.

The Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) makes traditional ownership the sole criteria for land claims despite the Woodward Royal Commission, which precipitated the Act, recommending the twin bases of traditional ownership and need.47 It defines «traditional Aboriginal owners» in relation to land as a local descent group of Aboriginals who: