We return to our study of the pleadings in the MTI and Wolastoqey claims.
Source - CBC News (Mi'gmawe'l Tplu'taqnn Inc.)
For our problem this week, we will return to the Aboriginal Title claims being advanced by the Wolastoqey Nation and Mi’gmawe’l Tplu’taqnn Inc. (MTI) in Atlantic Canada.
Please review the pleadings in the these claims, which we first looked at in week 3. One you have the pleadings, please return to this page and read the Cowichan and J.D. Irving v. Wolastoqey Nation decisions to address this week’s problem.
The Problem #
Based on the pleadings, how are the claimant Nations in the Mi’gmawe’l Tplu’taqnn Inc. claim approaching the question of whether or not Mi’gmaq Title is reconcilable with third-party fee simple interests? How is this approach similar to or different that those taken in the Cowichan and J.D. Irving,v Wolastoqey Nation decisions you read this week? From the pleadings in the Wolastoqey claim?
Readings for this Week
Choose one of the reading materials from the list below--ordered alphabetically--to start analyzing this week's problem. At the end of your reading path you should have covered each of the materials on the list.
- Cowichan Tribes v. Canada (Attorney General), 7 BCLR (7th) 1, 2025 BCSC 1490: The plaintiffs, on their own behalf and on behalf of the descendants of the historic Cowichan Nation, brought this action seeking a declaration of Aboriginal title to their traditional village of Tl'uqtinus on the south arm of the Fraser River, and to its surrounding lands and submerged lands.
- J.D. Irving, Limited et al. v. Wolastoqey Nation, 2025 NBCA 129: In its Statement of Claim, the Wolastoqey Nation sought a declaration of Aboriginal Title in ungranted Crown lands as well as lands subject to fee simple interests held by the appellant and other named Industrial Defendants, but not in lands subject to other fee simple interests held by Strangers to the Claim.