Skip to main content

PLEASE NOTE: For everyone’s safety, Fasken recommends anyone on-site at our Canadian offices be familiar with the COVID-19 recommendations in place which may include one or more of the following: social distancing, hand sanitizing, wearing a mask in common areas and proof of full vaccination. These measures apply to lawyers, staff, clients, service providers and other visitors.

Client Work

Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia, 2014 SCC 44

Reading Time 1 minute read Subscribe



Confidential Clients

On June 26, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada released its widely anticipated decision in Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia, 2014 SCC 44 providing more certainty on the test for Aboriginal title and the application of provincial laws to Aboriginal title lands. In short, semi-nomadic or nomadic Aboriginal peoples may establish title to land which they exclusively occupied. Prior to proof of Aboriginal title, provincial laws of general application apply to claim Aboriginal title lands but the Haida test for consultation applies. Provincial laws of general application can apply to proven Aboriginal title lands if the application of the law can be justified under the Sparrow test. A more complete analysis of the decision can be found by linking directly with the full text of our Aboriginal Bulletin. Fasken Martineau advised the interveners (the Business Council of British Columbia, the Council of Forest Industries, the Coast Forest Products Association, the Mining Association of British Columbia and the Association for Mineral Exploration British Columbia), with a team that included Chuck Willms and Kevin O’Callaghan.



    Receive email updates from our team