Sentences with phrase «indian land case»

Not exact matches

The case is often referred to as Oneida I because it is the first of three times the Oneida Indian Nation reached the Supreme Court in litigating its land rights claims.

Karachi is a more complex case as the land is sinking from the delta Karachi is on, but that is counteracted by the Indian suncontinent forcing up the continent of Asia as it moves northwards.

Some federal cases are of the less serious variety, due to jurisdictional issues — such as Native - American Nation Indian Reservations or federal lands.

She discussed some of the key cases of 2015 including the Northern Gateway Enbridge Pipeline regulatory review and judicial review, Chartrand v. British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations), 2015 BCCA 345, Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development), 2014 FC 1244, Hupacasath First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Foreign Affairs), 2015 FCA 4, Prophet River First Nation v. Minister of the Environment, 2015 BCSC 1682, Prophet River First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General), 2015 FC 1030, and Lubicon Lake Indian Nation v. Penn West Petroleum Ltd., 2015 ABQB 342.

The compelling logic of Delgamuukw on division of powers is now dismissed as leading to a number of «difficulties» (at para 133) and the startling conclusion that the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity is not just out of fashion (we know that from cases like Canadian Western Bank v Alberta, 2007 SCC 22, although see paras 60 — 61 of that case on the application of the doctrine to the «Indian Cases»), but it has no role whatsoever to play in relation to aboriginal title lands (at para 151) and perhaps even more generally in relation to the entire head of power (see paras 140, cases like Canadian Western Bank v Alberta, 2007 SCC 22, although see paras 60 — 61 of that case on the application of the doctrine to the «Indian Cases»), but it has no role whatsoever to play in relation to aboriginal title lands (at para 151) and perhaps even more generally in relation to the entire head of power (see paras 140, Cases»), but it has no role whatsoever to play in relation to aboriginal title lands (at para 151) and perhaps even more generally in relation to the entire head of power (see paras 140, 150).

Some federal cases are of the less serious variety, due to jurisdictional quirks — such as Indian Reservations or federal lands.

In that case, McCaleb v Rose, the appellant argued that provincial enactments could no longer be excluded on the basis of federal jurisdiction over «lands reserved for Indians» following Tsilhqot» in.

The Court in Sechelt Indian Band followed an earlier case from the Supreme Court, Derrickson v Derrickson, 1986 CanLII 56 (SCC), [1986] 1 SCR 285, where it held that provincial matrimonial property legislation was not applicable to the possession of lands reserved for Indians under section 91 (24).

The Supreme Court of Canada has passed up the opportunity to clarify the application of the doctrine of interjurisdictional immunity (IJI) to reserve lands following its decisions in Tsilhqot» in Nation v. British Columbia, 2014 SCC 44 and Grassy Narrows First Nation v. Ontario (Natural Resources), 2014 SCC 48 (Keewatin) in June 2014 by denying leave to appeal in the Sechelt Indian Band case.

In the case of the limitation periods — at least insofar as they relate to land — it seems to me that the argument in Delgamuukw that the clear and plain intent doctrine means that provinces can not extinguish land rights because any legislation achieving this would be «in relation to Indians» could apply here.

A more recent decision from the British Columbia Court of Appeal takes pains to insist that federalism continues to limit the application of provincial enactments to «lands reserved for Indians», even if this may not necessarily be the case for rights protected by section 35.

The Duty to Consult — the Groundhog Day Conundrum: Case Comment on Adams Lake Indian Band v. British Columbia (Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations)(June 17, 2013)

Rochester commercial litigation partner and co-chair of the firm's Indian Law and Gaming team David Tennant is quoted in this article about the Justice Department's delay in deciding whether to appeal a decision in a case regarding Mashpee Wampanoag tribal land.

Not only land / property fraud but the Andhra Pradesh government has also implemented Blockchain Technology to secure citizen's data.However, in case the words published by this Indian daily materializes, several bigshot exchanges operating in India such as Zebpay and Unocoin might have to pull down its shutters.

Such negotiated settlements have covered matters such as gaming on Indian reserves, child welfare, and in the case of Alaska, major Aboriginal title and land claim issues.