Aboriginal Rights

Question 1

Aboriginal Rights

R v Sparrow

Answer 1

Fisher from band charged with net longer than Fisheries Act allows. Sparrow argues requirement is against s35. Right to fish for food, social and ceremonial purpose (with inherent limit)  Successful because salmon fishery was integral part of distinctive culture.

Question 2

Aboriginal Rights

R v Van Der Peet

Answer 2

Had fishing license but selling salmon. Right to exchange fish for money & other goods (Commercial Right) Unsuccessful because not integral to culture.

Question 3

Aboriginal Rights

R v Sappier; R v Gray

Answer 3

Cut down crown timber. Right to harvest timber on Crown land (a right to a particular resource)Unsuccessful

Question 4

Aboriginal Righs

R v Powley

Answer 4

Killed moose with no licence. Right to hunt for food.  Successful

Question 5

Aboriginal Rights

R v Pamajewan

Answer 5

Right to self-govt (characterized as the right to participate in/regulate high stakes gambling).  Unsuccessful because it was not integral to distinctive culture.

Question 6

Aboriginal Rights

Ahousaht Indian Band v CND

Answer 6

Commercial right to fish for most species of fish on Westcoast of Van Island (commercial right).  Successful. Note- The same right was argued unsuccessfully in Lax Kwa’aalams (because of lack of evidence)

Question 7

Aboriginal Rights

Tsilgot’in Nation v British Columbia

Answer 7

Right to hunt and trap to get skins and pelts as means of securing a moderate livelihood (Commercial right with an inherent limit) Successful

Question 8

Aboriginal Rights

R v Gladstone

Answer 8

Right to sell herring spawn on kelp commercially (No inherent limit – just availability of fish, not room left for anyone else to use). Unsuccessful BUT right to sell was good just for food, social and ceremonial.

Question 9

Aboriginal rights