Legal Pleadings | ilclegalpleadings.usask.ca

: Mitchell v. Peguis Indian Band, [1990] 3 C.N.L.R. 46, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 85; Manitoba Hydro wrongly imposed taxes on the Peguis Indians with respect to the sale of electricity on reserve. The Peguis Indian Band negotiated a settlement with Manitoba Hydro for repayment of these taxes to the band. The lawyers who represented the Peguis Indian Band had negotiated a contingency fee with the band and subsequently obtained a garnishing order with respect to the settlement funds to be paid to the Band by Manitoba Hydro. The Band argued that the garnishing order was invalid pursuant to sections 89(1) and 90(1)(b) of the Indian Act. This document is the factum of the Appellants.

: Mitchell v. Peguis Indian Band, [1990] 3 C.N.L.R. 46, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 85; Manitoba Hydro wrongly imposed taxes on the Peguis Indians with respect to the sale of electricity on reserve. The Peguis Indian Band negotiated a settlement with Manitoba Hydro for repayment of these taxes to the band. The lawyers who represented the Peguis Indian Band had negotiated a contingency fee with the band, and subsequently obtained a garnishing order with respect to the settlement funds to be paid to the Band by Manitoba Hydro. The Band argued that the garnishing order was invalid pursuant to sections 89(1) and 90(1)(b) of the Indian Act. This document is the factum of the Respondents.

: Moon v. Campbell River Indian Band, [1997] 1 C.N.L.R. 77 (F.C.T.D.); The Plaintiffs were not considered to be members of the Band because they were added to the Band list by the Department of Indian Affairs. The Defendants contend that the Department of Indian Affairs did not have the consent of the Band to add members to the Band list as required by s. 13(b) of the Indian Act. The new members were therefore not entitled to per capita distributions from the Band.

: Morin et. al. v. Canada (A.G.) & Saskatchewan (A.G.), Sask. Q.B. No. 619 of A.D. 1994; The Metis plaintiffs claim Aboriginal title to a large portion of north-western Saskatchewan based on ancestral occupation and use. In addition, the plaintiffs claim an inherent right to self-government. The plaintiffs also argue that they are \\\Indians\\\" for the purposes of section 91(24) of the Indian Act and that the land claimed is \\\"lands reserved for Indians\\\" within the meaning of that provision also. This document is the plaintiffs\\' Statement of Claim."

: Morin v. Canada (Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs) (No. 1), [1999] 2 C.N.L.R. 188 (F.C.T.D.); Questions about the ordinary residents requirement within the Indian Act, s.77(1) are questioned by Mr. Morin who is from the Enoch Cree Nation.

: Morin v. Canada (Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs) (No. 1), [1999] 2 C.N.L.R. 188 (F.C.T.D.); Questions about the ordinary residents requirement within the Indian Act, s.77(1) are questioned by Mr. Morin who is from the Enoch Cree Nation.

: Mushkegowuk Council v. Ontario, [2000] 2 C.N.L.R. 79 (Ont. C.A.), setting aside decision in [1999]; The band Council sought a declaration that provisions of the Ontario Works Act were a violation of the right to self-government.

: Mushkegowuk Council v. Ontario, [2000] 2 C.N.L.R. 79 (Ont. C.A.), setting aside decision in [1999]; Mushkegowuk Council contends that there was a constitutional violation by the Ontario Works Act, which is the primary delivery agent of social assistance regarding the decision making powers set out in the Indian Act.

: Mushkegowuk Council v. Ontario, [2000] 2 C.N.L.R. 79 (Ont. C.A.), setting aside decision in [1999]; Mushkegowuk Council contends that there was a constitutional violation by the Ontario Works Act, which is the primary delivery agent of social assistance regarding the decision making powers set out in the Indian Act.

: Musqueam Indian Band v. Glass, [2001] 1 C.N.L.R. 208 (S.C.C.); The Musqueam are seeking to have the question of \\\current land value\\\" defined for a land surrender that was not absolute."

: N/A - see Factum #551; Is there a fiduciary duty to consult Aboriginal groups when there has not been an established existing Aboriginal right to a claimed area?

$Native Women\\'s Association of Canada v. R.$: 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).