Supreme Court: “NO duty to consult or accommodate Aboriginal concerns”


In section 78 on page 27 of the Jan 12/07 ‘Plaintiff’s Factum’ for the Caledonia Class Action lawsuit, solicitor John Findlay of Findlay McCarthy offers the following legal opinion based on a 2004 Judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Haida Nation v. British Columbia:

“The Supreme Court of Canada has made it clear that third parties to Aboriginal treaty claims have no duty to consult or accommodate the group that is making the claim. Further, third parties are not subject to any duty or are required to make any accommodation to enable the Province to obtain a remedy to an Aboriginal claim. It is up to the Province to find that remedy without affecting or compromising third party interests.”

Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), supra., per McLachlin C.J. at paras 52 to 56

A complete copy of the Caledonia Class Action Plaintiff’s Factum of Jan 12/07 can be found at listed under ‘Case Developments.’

See also the Supreme Court decision in Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests) [2004] See Section E. Do Third Parties Owe a Duty to Consult and Accommodate?, paras 52-56

Readers should note that Mr. Findlay is very experienced litigator, and is one of the few solicitors in Canada to have won a class-action lawsuit. As noted above, he is the author of the Caledonia Class Action suit.

Mark Vandermaas, Editor


Comments are closed.