Legal Pleadings | ilclegalpleadings.usask.ca

: Opetchesaht Indian Band v. Canada, [1998] 1 C.N.L.R. 134 (S.C.C.); The issue in this case is whether all grants of interests in Indigenous land, which affect the Band's possession, must be made by the Band and approval of the Governor in Council.

: Opetchesaht Indian Band v. Canada, [1998] 1 C.N.L.R. 134 (S.C.C.); The issue in this case is whether all grants of interests in Indigenous land, which affect the Band's possession, must be made by the Band and approval of the Governor in Council.

: Opetchesaht Indian Band v. Canada, [1998] 1 C.N.L.R. 134 (S.C.C.); The issue in this case is whether all grants of interests in Indigenous land, which affect the Band's possession, must be made by the Band and approval of the Governor in Council.

: Opetchesaht Indian Band v. Canada, [1998] 1 C.N.L.R. 134 (S.C.C.), aff’g [1994] 4 C.N.L.R. 68 (B.C.C; A question of whether a permit granted in 1952 for a right of way onto Kleehkoot Indian reserve No. 2 gave B.C. hydro the right to install power lines through a portion of that land in 1992.

: Osoyoos Indian Band v. Oliver (Town), [2002] 1 C.N.L.R. 271 (S.C.C.), rev’g [1999] 4 C.N.L.R. 91; Pursuant to s. 35 of the Indian Act, a canal was built across the reserve of the appellant Osoyoos Indian Band. Pursuant to s. 83(1)(a) of the Indian Act, the Osoyoos Indian Band assessed the respondent Crown in Right of British Columbia for taxes on the part of the canal that crossed the reserve. The Crown in Right of British Columbia objected to the tax assessment. (This is the appellant's record -- the date of this submission is estimated).

: Osoyoos Indian Band v. Oliver (Town), [2002] 1 C.N.L.R. 271 (S.C.C.), rev’g [1999] 4 C.N.L.R. 91; Pursuant to s. 35 of the Indian Act, a canal was built across the reserve of the appellant Osoyoos Indian Band. Pursuant to s. 83(1)(a) of the Indian Act, the Osoyoos Indian Band assessed the Respondent Crown in Right of British Columbia for taxes on the part of the canal that crossed the reserve. The Crown in Right of British Columbia objected to the tax assessment.

: Osoyoos Indian Band v. Oliver (Town), [2002] 1 C.N.L.R. 271 (S.C.C.), rev’g [1999] 4 C.N.L.R. 91; Pursuant to s. 35 of the Indian Act, a canal was built across the reserve of the Appellant Osoyoos Indian Band. Pursuant to s. 83(1)(a) of the Indian Act, the Osoyoos Indian Band assessed the Respondent Crown in Right of British Columbia for taxes on the part of the canal that crossed the reserve. The Crown in Right of British Columbia objected to the tax assessment.

: Osoyoos Indian Band v. Oliver (Town), [2002] 1 C.N.L.R. 271 (S.C.C.), rev’g [1999] 4 C.N.L.R. 91; Pursuant to s. 35 of the Indian Act, a canal was built across the reserve of the Appellant Osoyoos Indian Band. Pursuant to s. 83(1)(a) of the Indian Act, the Osoyoos Indian Band assessed the Respondent Crown in Right of British Columbia for taxes on the part of the canal that crossed the reserve. The Crown in Right of British Columbia objected to the tax assessment.

: Osoyoos Indian Band v. Oliver (Town), [2002] 1 C.N.L.R. 271 (S.C.C.), rev’g [1999] 4 C.N.L.R. 91; Pursuant to s. 35 of the Indian Act, a canal was built across the reserve of the Appellant Osoyoos Indian Band. Pursuant to s. 83(1)(a) of the Indian Act, the Osoyoos Indian Band assessed the Respondent Crown in Right of British Columbia for taxes on the part of the canal that crossed the reserve. The Crown in Right of British Columbia objected to the tax assessment.

: Osoyoos Indian Band v. Oliver (Town), [2002] 1 C.N.L.R. 271 (S.C.C.), rev’g [1999] 4 C.N.L.R. 91; Pursuant to s. 35 of the Indian Act, a canal was built across the reserve of the Appellant Osoyoos Indian Band. Pursuant to s. 83(1)(a) of the Indian Act, the Osoyoos Indian Band assessed the Respondent Crown in Right of British Columbia for taxes on the part of the canal that crossed the reserve. The Crown in Right of British Columbia objected to the tax assessment.

: Paddle Prairie Metis Settlement v. Metis Settlements Appeal Tribunal, [1999] 1 C.N.L.R. 134; At issue in this case is what extent the Paddle Prairie Metis Settlement has jurisdiction over specific legal matters.

: Papaschase Indian Band No. 136 (Descendents of) v. Canada (Attorney General), [2008] 2 C.N.L.R. 295; The Papaschase Band brought an action against the Government of Canada for breach of fiduciary duty, fraudulent and malicious behaviour and treaty breach dating to 1886 under Treaty 6. The Crown sought to have the action dismissed based on the Limitations of Actions Act, R.S.A., 1980, c. L-15, s.4. The Crown was successful in having the case dismissed; overturning the Alberta Court of Appeal ruling, thus restoring the Chamber's judge decision despite never having completed the discovery process. No constitutional question was submitted in this case.