Legal Pleadings
-
- R. v. Blais, [2001] 3 C.N.L.R. 187 (Man. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 4 C.N.L.R. 103 (Man. Q.B.)
- Whether a Métis person is considered to be an Indian under s. 13 of the NRTA 1930 regarding an Aboriginal right to hunt in Manitoba.
-
- R. v. Blais, [2001] 3 C.N.L.R. 187 (Man. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 4 C.N.L.R. 103 (Man. Q.B.), which aff’d
- Whether a Métis person is considered to be an Indian under s. 13 of the NRTA 1930 regarding an Aboriginal right to hunt in Manitoba.
-
- R. v. Blais, [2001] 3 C.N.L.R. 187 (Man. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 4 C.N.L.R. 103 (Man. Q.B.), which aff’d
- Whether a Métis person is considered to be an Indian under s. 13 of the NRTA 1930 regarding an Aboriginal right to hunt in Manitoba.
-
- R. v. Blais, [2001] 3 C.N.L.R. 187 (Man. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 4 C.N.L.R. 103 (Man. Q.B.), which aff’d
- Whether the Metis are considered Indians under s. 13 of the NRTA 1930 regarding an Aboriginal right to hunt in Manitoba.
-
- R. v. Breaker, [2001] 3 C.N.L.R. 213 (Alta. Prov. Ct.)
- The Defendant is charged for illegal hunting in a wildlife sanctuary. The Defendant contends that he has a treaty right to hunt and that the government failed to consult Siksika First Nation when creating the wildlife preserve.
-
- R. v. Brertton, [1998] 3 C.N.L.R. 122 (Alta. Q.B.)
- The accused is a member of Treaty 6 and shot a big horn sheep after he had entered a mineral lease area. The accused appeals the decision based on the Badger \visible incompatible use\" test. The accused seeks a remedy that affirms his right to hunt per the NRTA."
-
- R. v. Brertton, [2000] 1 C.N.L.R. 201 (Alta. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 3 C.N.L.R. 122 (Alta. Q.B.)
- The accused is a member of Treaty 6 and shot a big horn sheep after he had entered a mineral lease area. The accused appeals the decision based on the Badger \visible incompatible use\" test. The accused seeks a remedy that affirms his right to hunt per the NRTA."
-
- R. v. Brertton, [2000] 1 C.N.L.R. 201 (Alta. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 3 C.N.L.R. 122 (Alta. Q.B.)
- The accused is a member of Treaty 6 and shot a big horn sheep after he had entered a mineral lease area. The accused appeals the decision based on the Badger \visible incompatible use\" test. The accused seeks a remedy that affirms his right to hunt per the NRTA."
-
- R. v. Brertton, [2000] 1 C.N.L.R. 201 (Alta. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 3 C.N.L.R. 122 (Alta. Q.B.)
- The accused is a member of Treaty 6 and shot a big horn sheep after he had entered a mineral lease area. The accused appeals the decision based on the Badger \visible incompatible use\" test. The accused seeks a remedy that affirms his right to hunt per the NRTA. ( volume 2 of the applcation for leave to appeal)"
-
- R. v. Brertton, [2000] 1 C.N.L.R. 201 (Alta. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 3 C.N.L.R. 122 (Alta. Q.B.)
- The accused is a member of Treaty 6 and shot a big horn sheep after he had entered a mineral lease area. The accused appeals the decision based on the Badger \visible incompatible use\" test. The accused seeks a remedy that affirms his right to hunt per the NRTA. ( volume 1 of the applcation for leave to appeal)"
-
- R. v. Brertton, [2000] 1 C.N.L.R. 201 (Alta. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 3 C.N.L.R. 122 (Alta. Q.B.)
- The accused is a member of Treaty 6 and shot a big horn sheep after he had entered a mineral lease area. The accused appeals the decision based on the Badger \visible incompatible use\" test. The accused seeks a remedy that affirms his right to hunt per the NRTA. ( volume 3 of the applcation for leave to appeal)"
-
- R. v. Brertton, [2000] 1 C.N.L.R. 201 (Alta. C.A.), aff’g [1998] 3 C.N.L.R. 122 (Alta. Q.B.)
- The accused is a member of Treaty 6 and shot a big horn sheep after he had entered a mineral lease area. The accused appeals the decision based on the Badger \visible incompatible use\" test. The accused seeks a remedy that affirms his right to hunt per the NRTA. "