2 total
Court grants First Nation eviction order against band member for unpaid rent.
Matachewan First Nation (MFN) sought an order for eviction and possession of a house on its reserve occupied by Shannon Alberta, alleging unpaid rent and unauthorized use.
Ms. Alberta contended she owned the home or that rent was offset by repair costs, and that MFN breached a fiduciary duty.
She also sought a stay pending a federal investigation or judicial review.
The court found Ms. Alberta was a tenant, not an owner, and was in significant rent arrears without sufficient evidence of offset repairs.
It held that MFN's fiduciary duty as a Band did not extend to the contractual landlord-tenant relationship.
The requests for a stay were denied due to lack of specificity regarding the investigation and the expiry of the judicial review period.
The court granted MFN an order for possession, requiring Ms. Alberta to vacate by August 31, 2024.
Novel claim for Aboriginal title to Great Lakes submerged lands dismissed; Crown breached honour of the Crown regarding 1836 treaty.
The Saugeen Ojibway Nation (SON) brought two actions against the Crown and several municipalities.
In the Aboriginal Title Claim, SON sought a novel declaration of Aboriginal title to a large portion of the submerged lands in Lake Huron and Georgian Bay.
The court dismissed this claim, finding that while SON had a spiritual connection to the water and relied on fishing, they did not establish sufficient and exclusive physical occupation of the claimed submerged lands at the time of British sovereignty in 1763.
In the Treaty Claim, SON alleged that the Crown breached Treaty 45½ (1836) by failing to protect the Bruce Peninsula from settler encroachments, and breached duties during the negotiation of Treaty 72 (1854).
The court found that the Crown breached the honour of the Crown by failing to diligently fulfill its promise to protect the Peninsula from squatters, and by inappropriate conduct during the August 1854 treaty negotiations.
However, the court dismissed the claims for breach of fiduciary duty.
The court also declared that Treaty 72 did not extinguish SON's harvesting rights, which continue on unsold lands and on sold lands where the use is not incompatible with harvesting.
Property-specific remedies and defences were deferred to a second phase of the trial.