First Nations

Child protection proceeding under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 in which the court was asked to make statutory findings as to whether the children are Indigenous within the meaning of the CYFSA and the federal An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families.

The respondent mother self-identified as First Nations and one child had a clearly established First Nation and Métis paternal lineage supported by extensive genealogical and historical documentation.

The court held that the two legislative schemes impose distinct evidentiary thresholds, with the Federal Act being more stringent than the CYFSA, and declined to find that a CYFSA finding automatically produces a Federal Act finding.

Applying the framework articulated in the prior related decision, the court found that the children's self-identification, ancestral connection, and sustained acceptance by and engagement with the modern Indigenous community in Ottawa satisfied the evidentiary requirements under both statutes.

The plaintiffs, who operate a specialized First Nations Specific Claims insurance business, brought a motion for an interlocutory and permanent injunction against former employees and independent contractors who started a competing brokerage.

The plaintiffs sought to prohibit the defendants from competing, soliciting clients, and using confidential information.

The court dismissed the motion, finding no non-competition or non-solicitation agreements existed, and the plaintiffs failed to establish a strong prima facie case that the defendants misused proprietary information.

The court ordered the defendants to return and delete any of the plaintiffs' confidential information in their possession, as proposed by the defendants.

The Ontario Court of Appeal remitted the issue of the Huron plaintiffs' Stage One trial costs to the Superior Court for reconsideration, questioning the substantial difference in hours claimed compared to the Superior plaintiffs.

The court found the Huron plaintiffs' costs to be fair and reasonable, noting the added complexity of representing 21 First Nations, the extensive evidence led on the Anishinaabe perspective, the incorporation of Anishinaabe Ceremony and protocol, and the necessary creation of the Robinson Huron Trust to manage the litigation.

The court concluded that the costs were proportionate and within the reasonable expectations of the parties given the historical significance and complexity of the treaty claims.

In a child protection proceeding, the court held a focused hearing to determine whether three children were First Nations, Inuk or Métis children under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act.

The court found that the two older children were First Nations children based on their own self-identification and ancestral connection through their father.

The youngest child, who had a different father and no paternal Indigenous ancestry, was also found to be a First Nations child based on her sibling relationship with the older children, despite the court's concerns regarding the mother's standalone claim of Indigenous identity.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario partially allowed an appeal by the family of a deceased First Nations child, Brody Meekis, who died of strep throat following an allegedly flawed coronial investigation.

The family's civil claim, which included allegations of misfeasance in public office, negligent supervision, and Charter s. 15 discrimination, had been entirely struck by the motion judge.

The Court of Appeal reinstated the misfeasance in public office and Charter claims, finding that the motion judge erred in concluding they had no reasonable prospect of success.

The court clarified that discriminatory conduct, even within discretionary powers, can constitute unlawful action for misfeasance, and that adverse impact discrimination under s. 15 of the Charter can arise from the application of seemingly neutral laws that disproportionately disadvantage protected groups.

The claim for negligent supervision remained struck.

The Children's Aid Society sought a finding that three First Nations children were in need of protection and an order placing them in the custody of their maternal aunt in Alberta.

The father sought the return of the children to his care or placement with his family under a supervision order.

The court found the children in need of protection due to the father's ongoing housing instability, mental health challenges, and substance use issues.

Applying the augmented best interests test under both provincial and federal legislation, the court concluded that placement with the maternal aunt was the least disruptive alternative that would protect the children and foster their cultural identity.

The court granted custody to the maternal aunt and ordered specified access for the father.

The appellant appealed from an order of the Superior Court dismissing his preliminary motion to challenge the authenticity of a joint venture agreement through forensic document examination.

The Court of Appeal found that the motion judge had mischaracterized the nature of the preliminary motion and made material factual errors in his analysis.

The court allowed the appeal, set aside portions of the October order, and reinstated the April order pending the appellant's opportunity to bring a motion in Superior Court regarding the document's authenticity.

The court also preserved the respondent's right to pursue relief if the appellant failed to bring such motion within 30 days.

The respondent retained its costs award from the application judge, and no costs were awarded on the appeal.

A band member leased lands from the Walpole Island First Nations Band Council to operate a hunting camp and made substantial improvements including constructing a lodge.

The central dispute concerned whether the band member was entitled to credit against outstanding rental payments for the cost of improvements made.

The trial judge awarded credit of $532,500 for improvements plus a $40,000 deposit, less $430,000 in rent owing, resulting in a judgment of $142,500 in the band member's favour.

The band appealed, arguing that the trial judge failed to apply section 2(3) of the Indian Act, which requires Band Council resolutions for binding arrangements.

The appeal court upheld the trial judgment, finding that the Band Council had undertaken to credit the band member for leasehold improvements and that the band member was entitled to aggravated damages for an improper eviction.

The accused, a member of the Walpole Island First Nation and former Canadian Armed Forces member, was convicted of gun trafficking in 2015 and received a 10-year firearms prohibition.

He subsequently pled guilty to transporting a firearm in a careless manner while hunting.

He applied for a Section 113 exemption to permit hunting for sustenance purposes.

The court granted the exemption, finding that sustenance hunting for Indigenous persons must be interpreted broadly to recognize cultural and traditional significance, and that the accused had demonstrated a genuine need to hunt as part of his cultural identity and role as a family provider.

The court imposed conditions on the exemption and sentenced the accused to a suspended sentence with probation.

The Children's Aid Society of Algoma brought a motion to transfer carriage of a child protection status review proceeding to Nogdawindamin Family and Community Services, a newly designated native children's aid society.

The motion involved determining whether Nogdawindamin CAS had jurisdiction under its ministerial designation to act as the applicant society.

The court examined the complex jurisdictional issues arising from the designation, including territorial jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction based on aboriginal status, and the conditions imposed on the designation.

The court granted the motion, finding that Nogdawindamin CAS had jurisdiction to carry out its mandate as a children's aid society in this case involving an Indian child identified as a member of one of the seven listed First Nations.

This decision addresses a motion by Children's Aid Society of Algoma seeking to substitute Nogdawindamin Family and Community Services as the applicant in a child protection proceeding.

The motion arose from the recent designation of Nogdawindamin as a native children's aid society effective April 1, 2017.

The court examined the Minister's designation of Nogdawindamin and determined that the child in question did not fall within any of the paragraphs of the designation that were currently in effect.

The court dismissed the transfer motion, finding that Nogdawindamin lacked jurisdiction to act as the applicant society in this particular case.

The Children's Aid Society of Algoma brought a motion to transfer carriage of child protection proceedings to Nogdawindamin Family and Community Services, a newly designated native children's aid society.

The motion involved two children whose father was a registered member of a First Nation band.

The court examined the ministerial designation of Nogdawindamin CAS, the jurisdictional limitations imposed by conditions in that designation, and the statutory framework governing native societies under the Child and Family Services Act.

The court determined that Nogdawindamin CAS had jurisdiction over the children as members of the father's First Nation band and granted the transfer motion, while also addressing broader issues regarding the interpretation of ministerial designations and the court's role in adjudicating society jurisdiction in child protection proceedings.

This decision addresses a motion by Children's Aid Society of Algoma (Algoma CAS) seeking to substitute Nogdawindamin Family and Community Services (Nogdawindamin CAS) as the applicant in child protection proceedings.

The motion arises from the recent designation of Nogdawindamin, a native agency, as a children's aid society effective April 1, 2017.

The court examined the Minister's designation of Nogdawindamin CAS, which contains both geographical and personal jurisdictional components, as well as conditions restricting certain functions pending consultation and coordination with other First Nations communities.

The court determined that the children and mother in this case, as registered or eligible members of Batchewana First Nation, fall within Nogdawindamin CAS's jurisdiction under paragraph 1 of its designation.

The motion was granted, and the proceeding was transferred to Nogdawindamin CAS with ancillary orders for change of solicitors and amendment of the title of the proceeding.

The Crown appealed the acquittal of a former senior advisor to the Prime Minister on a charge of influence peddling contrary to section 121(1)(d) of the Criminal Code.

The respondent had negotiated a contract providing commissions to his girlfriend on sales of water treatment systems to First Nations communities, with the understanding that he would use his government contacts to promote the company.

The trial judge acquitted the respondent, finding that there was no "matter of business relating to the government" because First Nations communities had autonomy in purchasing decisions and INAC was not involved in approving such purchases.

The Court of Appeal was divided: the majority allowed the appeal and entered a conviction, interpreting "any matter of business relating to the government" broadly to include the respondent's exercise of influence on government officials regarding the sale of products to First Nations.

The dissent would have dismissed the appeal, finding no error of law in the trial judge's interpretation and reasoning.

A summary judgment motion brought by the Children's Lawyer on behalf of two Indigenous children seeking Crown wardship without access.

The maternal grandfather and Walpole Island First Nation opposed the motion, arguing a trial was necessary.

The court found no genuine issue for trial and granted Crown wardship, finding that the children's best interests were served by remaining in their current foster placement with an Indigenous family rather than transitioning to the grandfather's care on the First Nation territory.

The court considered the children's special needs, cultural identity, continuity of care, and the grandfather's inconsistent access pattern over two years.

An 11-year-old First Nations child from Six Nations of the Grand River was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia with a 90-95% cure rate with chemotherapy.

The child's mother withdrew consent for chemotherapy to pursue traditional medicine consistent with their longhouse beliefs.

The hospital applied under section 40(4) of the Child and Family Services Act seeking a protection order.

The court dismissed the application, finding that the mother's decision to pursue traditional medicine constituted an exercise of an aboriginal right protected under section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982.

The court held that the child could not be found in need of protection when the substitute decision-maker exercised a constitutionally protected right.

The Children's Aid Society of Brant brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a Crown wardship order without access for a child born to a 15-year-old First Nations mother.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that insufficient evidence regarding the mother's background and available resources had been presented.

The court identified triable issues concerning the mother's upbringing, available community resources, and realistic rehabilitation timeframe, and adjourned the matter to a trial management conference.

The accused, a 25-year-old member of the Nipissing First Nation with an extensive violent criminal history, was sentenced following his guilty plea to breaching a high-risk offender recognizance under section 810.2 of the Criminal Code and uttering a threat to burn property contrary to section 264.1.

The breach involved failing to notify police of a change of address.

The threat was made at his mother's apartment complex when he was denied entry to retrieve belongings.

The court imposed a sentence of 45 days jail to be served intermittently on weekends, along with a three-year probation order with conditions including anger management and substance abuse counselling, cultural and First Nations-based programming, and no contact with the complainants.

The accused was charged with aggravated assault by wounding and aggravated sexual assault arising from an incident in a First Nation community.

The Crown alleged the accused violently attacked the complainant, causing a skull fracture, loss of teeth, and orbital bone fracture, as well as injuries to the complainant's genitals.

The accused claimed he was justified in using force to defend his partner from what he believed was a sexual assault in progress.

The court found the accused guilty of aggravated assault by wounding but acquitted him of the sexual assault charges, finding that the encounter between the complainant and the accused's partner was consensual and did not constitute sexual assault.

A 19-year-old First Nations offender pleaded guilty to robbery after assaulting a victim and stealing a small amount of marijuana.

The victim sustained a broken jaw from a single punch.

The court applied Gladue principles in sentencing, considering the offender's Aboriginal background, criminal history, youth, and genuine remorse.

The Crown sought a mid to upper reformatory range sentence (12 months to 2 years less a day), while the defence sought time served.

The court imposed a sentence of time served (218 days in custody) plus two years probation with conditions including substance abuse counselling and culturally appropriate First Nations-based programming.