Legal Pleadings | ilclegalpleadings.usask.ca

$Native Women\\'s Association of Canada v. R.$: Native Women\\'s Association of Canada v. R.; These proceedings are about NWAC\\'s demand for equality in the division of matrimonial property and land (amoung other things).

$Native Women\\'s Association of Canada v. R.$: Native Women\\'s Association of Canada v. R.; These proceedings are about NWAC\\'s demand for equality in the division of matrimonial property and land (amoung other things).

: Native Women’s Assn of Canada v. Canada, [1995] 1 C.N.L.R. 47 (S.C.C.), rev’g [1992] 4 C.N.L.R. 71 (; At issue is whether NWAC had been denied freedom of expression ss. 2(b) and 28 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by their exclusion at a table for constitutional matters.

: Native Women’s Assn of Canada v. Canada, [1995] 1 C.N.L.R. 47 (S.C.C.), rev’g [1992] 4 C.N.L.R. 71 (; At issue is whether NWAC had been denied freedom of expression ss. 2(b) and 28 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by their exclusion at a table for constitutional matters.The Respondent group made a claim of discrimination based on sex when the Federal government allotted money to Aboriginal organizations to allow participation in Constitutional discussions. The Respondent group claims that male dominated Aboriginal groups were given funding and no direct funding was given to Aboriginal women.

: Native Women’s Assn of Canada v. Canada, [1995] 1 C.N.L.R. 47 (S.C.C.), rev’g [1992] 4 C.N.L.R. 71 (; At issue is whether NWAC had been denied freedom of expression ss. 2(b) and 28 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by their exclusion at a table for Constitutional matters.The Respondent group made a claim of discrimination based on sex when the Federal government allotted money to Aboriginal organizations to allow participation in Constitutional discussions. The Respondent group claims that male dominated Aboriginal groups were given funding and no direct funding was given to Aboriginal women.

: New Brunswick v. Union of New Brunswick Indian Bands, [1998] 3 C.N.L.R. 295; The issue in this case focuses on whether Indians living on Reserve have to pay sales tax for items purchased off-Reserve, but consumed on-Reserve.

: Nowegijick v. The Queen, [1983] 1 S.C.R. 29; The Appellant, a registered Indian living on reserve, objected to income taxation on his wages. The corporate head office of his employer was located on reserve and he received his wage payments on reserve also; however, the actual work was conducted off the reserve. Section 87 of the Indian Act provides that personal property of an Indian situated on reserve is exempt from taxation. The issue was whether the wages constituted personal property situated on reserve and therefore were exempt from taxation. This document is the factum of the Appellant and Interveners.

: Nowegijick v. The Queen, [1983] 1 S.C.R. 29; The appellant, a registered Indian living on reserve, objected to income taxation on his wages. The corporate head office of his employer was located on reserve, and he received his wage payments on reserve also. However, the actual work was conducted off the reserve. Section 87 of the Indian Act provides that personal property of an Indian situated on reserve is exempt from taxation. The issue was whether the wages constituted personal property situated on reserve and therefore were exempt from taxation. This document is the factum of the Respondent.

: Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. v. Canada (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans) (1998), [2000] 3 C.N.L.R. 114; Nunavut Tunngavik are apealing a decision by the Department of Fisheries establish turbot quotas for the Davis Strait fishery.

: Onespot v. Starlight; The Plaintiff claims that he was defamed in a letter to the Minister of Indian Affairs. The defendant claims that the statements were true and privileged information. The plaintiff had sought an interim injunction to stop the Defendant from repeating the allegations.

: Onespot v. Starlight; The Plaintiff claims that he was defamed in a letter to the Minister of Indian Affairs. The defendant claims that the statements were true and privileged information. The plaintiff had sought an interim injunction to stop the defendant from repeating the allegations.