The plaintiff brought a summary judgment motion challenging s. 6 of the Indian Act and the Registrar’s Proof of Paternity Policy under s. 15 of the Charter after being denied Indian status registration because her paternal grandfather was unknown and unknowable.
She alleged discrimination based on race, gender, illegitimacy, and family or marital status.
The court held that all applicants bear the same onus to prove entitlement to registration and that unknowable paternity is not an analogous ground under s. 15.
No Charter infringement was established, so the constitutional claim failed, although the court expressed concern in obiter that the policy’s evidentiary demands may not be fully consistent with the Act’s purpose and history.
