First Nations

The plaintiffs brought a motion on consent for a partial judgment to give effect to a settlement agreement regarding past annuities payable under the Robinson Huron Treaty of 1850.

The settlement resolves claims that the Crown failed to fulfill its promise to augment the annuity over time.

Under the agreement, the federal and provincial Crowns will pay $10 billion to the plaintiffs.

The court approved the settlement agreement and granted the partial judgment.

The applicants, a First Nation and its former Chief, brought an application under Rule 14.05(3)(d) and (h) seeking declaratory relief regarding the interpretation of the Environmental Assessment Act and the Crown's Duty to Consult and Accommodate.

The application arose in the context of the proposed Marten Falls Community Access Road in the Ring of Fire region.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the application, finding it lacked jurisdiction to rewrite legislation or provide a de facto reference on how the Crown should discharge its duty in the future without a live factual dispute.

The court held that the application did not raise a justiciable issue and was not properly brought under the Rules of Civil Procedure.

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 appellant, a kin caregiver for a First Nations child, appealed an order dismissing a child protection proceeding and denying her motion to be added as a party.

The motion judge had dismissed the proceeding based on a customary care agreement signed by the biological parents, the child's aunt, the First Nation, and the Children's Aid Society, which excluded the appellant.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the appellant met the statutory definition of a 'parent' under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act and was entitled to party status.

The Court further held that the proceeding could not be dismissed on consent without the appellant's participation and a proper analysis of the child's best interests.

The applicants, comprising a wholesale fuel supplier servicing First Nations communities, sought initial protection under the CCAA due to a looming liquidity crisis precipitated by alleged executive misconduct and missing financial records.

The court granted the initial order, including a stay of proceedings extending to regulatory authorities to prevent the revocation of essential fuel licenses.

The court also appointed KPMG as Monitor with enhanced investigatory powers, approved administration and D&O charges, authorized payment of critical pre-filing expenses, and granted a sealing order over a confidential affidavit to respect comity with a foreign court order.

The Children's Aid Society sought an extended society care order for three First Nations children who had been in foster care for over three years.

The mother, who had overcome substance abuse and secured housing, sought their return.

The court found the children in need of protection due to the mother's past neglect and failure to protect them.

Applying the augmented best interests test under the CYFSA and the Federal Act, the court concluded that removing the children from their long-term foster mother, to whom they were securely attached, would cause unacceptable emotional harm.

The children were placed in extended society care with access granted to the mother, siblings, and father.

The applicant children's aid society sought an order for extended society care for two First Nations children with special needs.

The children were removed from their father's care following disclosures of inappropriate touching, though the court could not conclude on a balance of probabilities that the father was the perpetrator.

The court found the children in need of protection due to a failure to provide treatment, emotional harm, and risk of emotional harm stemming from the parents' residential instability, the mother's unaddressed alcohol addiction, and exposure to domestic violence.

The court ordered the children placed in extended society care, finding that neither parent nor the maternal grandmother could provide a safe and stable environment.

Specified access was granted to both parents and the children's First Nations band.

The applicant society brought a motion for summary judgment regarding the disposition of a child protection matter involving a First Nations child.

While the parties agreed the child should remain in the custody of maternal kin, the respondent mother opposed the father having joint decision-making and unsupervised parenting time, and opposed a formal contact order for the paternal extended family.

The court granted summary judgment, finding no genuine issue for trial.

The court ordered that the child remain with the maternal kin, granted supervised parenting time to the father, and made a specific contact order for the paternal extended family to ensure the child remains connected to his Algonquin heritage, given the father's inconsistent involvement.

The Children's Aid Society brought a motion for summary judgment in a child protection application, seeking a final order granting joint decision-making responsibility of an Indigenous child to the mother and her former partner.

The father opposed the motion, arguing for shared decision-making and raising concerns about the child's exposure to her First Nations heritage.

The court found no genuine issue requiring a trial and concluded that the proposed order was in the child's best interests, noting the history of domestic violence and the proposed caregivers' commitment to fostering the child's cultural identity.

The motion for summary judgment was granted.

The appellants, Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation and Ontario, appealed an arbitration decision that found they breached the Gaming Revenue Sharing and Financial Agreement (GRSFA) by ceasing to share certain non-gaming and complimentary revenues with the respondent, Ontario First Nations (2008) Limited Partnership.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, holding that the standard of review for commercial arbitrations remains reasonableness post-Vavilov.

The court found the arbitration panel's contractual interpretation was reasonable, firmly rooted in the agreement's text and surrounding circumstances, and that the honour of the Crown doctrine was correctly applied to the government-to-government agreement.

The applicant children's aid society brought a motion for summary judgment to place twin infants into extended society care.

The children, who are of First Nations heritage, were born prematurely with special medical needs due to the mother's substance abuse.

The mother did not participate in the proceedings.

The father opposed the motion, seeking to have the children placed in his care.

The court found that the father lacked suitable housing, failed to acknowledge the children's medical needs, and exhibited concerning behaviours indicative of unaddressed mental health issues.

The First Nations bands supported the society's plan, which included ongoing contact with a maternal aunt.

The court granted summary judgment, finding no genuine issue for trial and concluding that extended society care was in the children's best interests.

The Children's Aid Society sought an order for extended society care without access for two children who had been in care for 27 months.

The mother sought the return of the children or joint care with the maternal grandmother.

The court first determined that the children were First Nations but had no identified band.

The court found the children continued to be in need of protection due to the mother's transience, untreated mental health issues, and high-conflict behaviour.

Concluding that no less disruptive alternatives were viable, the court ordered extended society care.

Access was denied as it was not in the children's best interests and would likely impair adoption opportunities.

The applicant brought a motion for summary judgment in a status review application, seeking extended society care for three children and a supervision order for a fourth.

The respondent father had provided inconsistent evidence regarding whether the children identified as First Nations.

The court adjourned the motion, ordering the parties to provide further evidence clarifying the children's First Nations status and band identification, as this information is mandatory under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 before determining the appropriate disposition.

The Children's Aid Society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a final order to place a five-year-old child in extended society care without access for the purpose of adoption.

The child had been in care for over two and a half years due to the parents' substance abuse issues.

Despite numerous opportunities and referrals, neither parent successfully completed relapse prevention or treatment programs.

The court granted summary judgment, finding no genuine issue for trial, and ordered the child placed in extended care with no access to the parents, concluding it was in the child's best interests.

The applicant society sought an order for extended society care without access for a three-year-old child who had been in care for over two years.

The respondent mother opposed the application, seeking the return of the child to her care with a supervision order, or alternatively, access.

The court first determined that the child was not a First Nations, Inuk, or Métis child under the CYFSA, finding insufficient evidence of a connection to any specific community.

The court found the child in need of protection due to the mother's unaddressed mental health issues, severe PTSD, and substance abuse, which impaired her parenting capacity.

The court concluded that the mother was unable to safely parent the child and ordered extended society care.

Access was denied, as the court found it would not be beneficial or meaningful to the child and could impair future adoption opportunities.

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 appellant, a tobacco manufacturer on the Six Nations reserve, appealed a Divisional Court decision dismissing its application for judicial review of the Minister of Finance's demand for security under section 12(2)(f.1) of the Tobacco Tax Act.

The appellant manufactured tobacco for export and for sale on First Nations reserves, neither of which were subject to Ontario's tobacco tax.

The appellant argued the Minister's interpretation of the security requirement was unreasonable and that the provision was unconstitutional as an indirect tax on exported goods.

The Court of Appeal upheld the Divisional Court's decision, finding the Minister's interpretation reasonable and the provision constitutionally valid as incidental to a valid direct taxation scheme.

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 arose 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 imposed conditions restricting its jurisdiction over certain categories of persons.

The court determined that it has authority to adjudicate jurisdictional issues and that transfer motions require more than mere notification to the court.

The court found that the subject child fell within Nogdawindamin CAS's jurisdiction under paragraph 1 of the designation (geographic jurisdiction on First Nation reserves) and ordered the transfer.

The plaintiff, a not-for-profit corporation representing aboriginal communities, brought an action for trespass and damages against the defendants, who claimed to be the elected representatives of a member First Nation.

The plaintiff moved to strike portions of the defendants' statement of defence and their entire counterclaim.

The court struck certain paragraphs of the statement of defence that pleaded irrelevancies, with leave to amend one paragraph.

The court also struck the counterclaim in its entirety, finding that claims for interference in an election or internal governance are not causes of action known to law, and that the allegations of defamation and injurious falsehood lacked the necessary elements and particulars.

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.