Law of Canada

Jump to navigation Jump to search

The legal system of Canada is pluralist: its foundations lie in the English common law system (inherited from its period as a colony of the British Empire), the French civil law system (inherited from its French Empire past)[1][2] and Indigenous law systems developed by the various Indigenous Nations, such as Plains Cree wiyasowêwina or Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.[3][4]

The Constitution of Canada provide the framework within which the systems interact and operate. Canadian constitutional law outlines Canada's system of government and the civil and human rights of those who are citizens of Canada and non-citizens in Canada.[5]

Canada recognizes only two orders of government with sovereignty, arising from heritage, common law and the constitution: federal and provincial. All other forms of government, including municipal governments, must receive their powers through delegation, making municipal, local and regional governments creatures of sovereign governments. Territories receive their powers via delegation from the Federal Government. The federal government has jurisdiction over certain domains which are regulated exclusively by Parliament, as well as all matters and disputes between provinces. These generally include inter-provincial transport (rail, air and marine transport) as well as inter-provincial trade and commerce (which generally concerns energy, the environment, agriculture). The criminal law is an area of exclusive federal jurisdiction and has its origins in the English common law. Prosecutions of most criminal offences are conducted by the provincial Attorneys General, acting under the Criminal Code.

Constitution of Canada[edit]

Cover of the Constitution Act, 1867

Pursuant to section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, Canada's constitution is its supreme law, and any law passed by any federal, provincial, or territorial government that is inconsistent with the constitution is invalid.[6][7]

The Constitution Act, 1982 stipulates that Canada's constitution includes that act, a series of thirty Acts and orders referred to in a schedule to that Act (the most notable of which is the Constitution Act, 1867), and any amendment to any of those Acts.[8] However, the Supreme Court of Canada has found that this list is not intended to be exhaustive, and in 1998's Reference re Secession of Quebec identified four "supporting principles and rules" that are included as unwritten elements of the constitution: federalism, democracy, constitutionalism and the rule of law, and respect for minorities.[9] While these principles are an enforceable part of Canada's constitution, Canadian courts have not used them to override the written text of the constitution, instead confining their role to "filling gaps".[10]

Because the Constitution Act, 1867 provides that Canada's constitution is "similar in Principle to that of the United Kingdom",[11] which is considered to be an uncodified constitution, the Supreme Court has also recognized the existence of constitutional conventions. In 1981's Reference re a Resolution to amend the Constitution, the Court provided three factors necessary for the existence of a constitutional convention: a practice or agreement developed by political actors, a recognition that they are bound to follow that practice or agreement, and a purpose for that practice or agreement. It also found that, while these conventions are not law and are therefore unenforceable by the courts, courts may recognize conventions in their rulings.[12]

Copies of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

The Constitution Act, 1867 assigns powers to the provincial and federal governments. Matters under federal jurisdiction include criminal law, trade and commerce, banking, and immigration.[13] The federal government also has the residual power to make laws necessary for Canada's "peace, order and good government".[14] One of the major areas of provincial jurisdiction is property and civil rights, which includes broad power to enact laws of a civil nature, such as property law, contract law and family law. Provincial jurisdiction includes other matters, such as natural resources, hospitals, municipalities, education (except education on First Nation reserves).[13][15]

The Constitution Act, 1867 also provides that, while provinces establish their own superior courts, the federal government appoints their judges.[16] It also gives the federal Parliament the right to establish a court system responsible for federal law and a general court of appeal to hear appeals of decisions of both federal and provincial courts.[17] This last power resulted in the federal Parliament's creation of the Supreme Court of Canada.[18]

The Constitution Act, 1982 created a mechanism by which Canada's constitution could be amended by joint action of federal and provincial legislatures; prior to 1982, most of it could be amended only by the Parliament of the United Kingdom.[19] It also contains the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which grants individual rights that may not be contravened by any provincial or federal law.[20]

Legislation[edit]

Acts passed by the Parliament of Canada and by provincial legislatures are the primary sources of law in Canada. Sections 91 and 94A of the Constitution Act, 1867 set out the subject matters for exclusive federal jurisdiction, while sections 92, 92A, and 94 set out the areas of exclusive provincial legislation. Section 95 sets out areas of concurrent federal and provincial jurisdiction.[21]

Laws passed by the federal Parliament are initially published in the Canada Gazette, a federal government newspaper published regularly and which includes new statutes and regulations.[22][23] Federal statutes are subsequently published in the Annual Statutes of Canada. From time to time, the federal government will prepare a consolidation of federal statuts, known as the Revised Statutes of Canada.[24] The most recent federal consolidation was in 1985.

Laws passed by the provinces follow a similar practice. The Acts are pronounced in a provincial gazette, published annually and consolidated from time to time.

The Revised Statutes of Canada is the federal statutory consolidation of statutes enacted by the Parliament of Canada. In each Canadian province, there is a similar consolidation of the statute law of the province. The Revised Statutes of British Columbia, Revised Statutes of Alberta, Statutes of Manitoba, Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1978, Revised Statutes of New Brunswick, Revised Statutes of Nova Scotia, Statutes of Prince Edward Island, Consolidated Statutes of Newfoundland and Labrador, Revised Statutes of Ontario, and Revised Statutes of Quebec are the statutory consolidations of each Canadian province. They contain all of the major topic areas and most of the statutes enacted by the governments in each province. These statutes in these provinces do not include criminal law, as the criminal law in Canada is an exclusive jurisdiction of the federal Parliament, which has enacted the Criminal Code, which is included in the Revised Statutes of Canada.

Legal traditions[edit]

Common law[edit]

Nine of the provinces, other than Quebec, and the federal territories, follow the common law legal tradition.[25] While the federal territories use common law, Indigenous nations and their associated territories do not (see below). Equally, courts have power under the provincial Judicature Acts to apply equity.

As with all common law countries, Canadian law adheres to the doctrine of stare decisis.[26] Lower courts must follow the decisions of higher courts by which they are bound. For instance, all Ontario lower courts are bound by the decisions of the Ontario Court of Appeal and all British Columbia lower courts are bound by the decisions of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. However, no Ontario court is bound by decisions of any British Columbia court and no British Columbia court is bound by decisions of any Ontario court. Nonetheless, decisions made by a province's highest court (provincial Courts of Appeal) are often considered as "persuasive" even though they are not binding on other provinces.[27]

Only the Supreme Court of Canada has authority to bind all lower courts in the country with a single ruling, but the Supreme Court cannot bind itself.[28] The busier courts, such as the Court of Appeal for Ontario, for example, are often looked to for guidance on many local matters of law outside the province, especially in matters such as evidence and criminal law.

When there is little or no existing Canadian decision on a particular legal issue and it becomes necessary to look to a non-Canadian legal authority for reference, decisions of English courts and American courts are often utilized.[29] In light of the long-standing history between English law and Canadian law, the English Court of Appeal and the House of Lords are often cited as and considered persuasive authority, and are often followed.[29] If the legal question at issue relates to matters of constitutional or privacy law, however, decisions of United States courts are more likely to be utilized by Canadian lawyers because there is a much greater body of jurisprudence in U.S. law than English law in these areas.[citation needed]

Decisions from Commonwealth nations, aside from England, are also often treated as persuasive sources of law in Canada.

Due to Canada's historical connection with the United Kingdom, decisions of the House of Lords before 1867 are technically still binding on Canada unless they have been overturned by the Supreme Court of Canada, and Canada is still bound by the decisions of the Privy Council before the abolishment of appeals to that entity in 1949.[30] In practice, however, no court in Canada has declared itself bound by any English court decision for decades, and it is highly unlikely that any Canadian court would do so in the future.[30]

Criminal offences are found only within the Criminal Code and other federal statutes; an exception is that contempt of court is the only remaining common law offence in Canada.[31]

Civil law[edit]

For historical reasons, Quebec has a hybrid legal system. Private law follows the civil law tradition, originally expressed in the Coutume de Paris as it applied in what was then New France.[32] Today, the jus commune of Quebec is codified in the Civil Code of Quebec. As for public law, it was made that of the conquering British nation after the fall of New France in 1760, that is, the common law. It is important to note that the distinction between civil law and common law is not based on the division of powers set out in the Constitution Act, 1867. Therefore, legislation enacted by the provincial legislature in matters of public law, such as the Code of Penal Procedure, should be interpreted following the common law tradition. Likewise, legislation enacted by the federal Parliament in matters of private law, such as the Divorce Act, is to be interpreted following the civil law tradition and in harmony with the Civil Code of Quebec.

Indigenous legal traditions[edit]

Canada was founded on the original territories of over 900 different Indigenous groups, each using different Indigenous legal traditions. Cree, Blackfoot, Mi'kmaq and numerous other First Nations; Inuit; and Métis will apply their own legal traditions in daily life, creating contracts, working with governmental and corporate entities, ecological management and criminal proceedings and family law. Most maintain their laws through traditional governance alongside the elected officials and federal laws.[33] The legal precedents set millennia ago are known through stories and derived from the actions and past responses as well as through continuous interpretation by elders and law-keepers—the same process by which nearly all legal traditions, from common laws and civil codes, are formed.

While the many legal traditions appear similar in that none were codified, each has quite different sets of laws. Many laws stem from stories which in turn may stem from writings or markings, such as geographic features,[34] petroglyphs, pictographs, wiigwaasabakoon and more. Inuit Nunangat's governance[35] differs quite markedly from its many-nationed neighbour Denendeh, as Denendeh's diverse Dene Laws[36] differ quite markedly from laws governing Lingít Aaní,[37][38] Gitx̱san Lax̱yip[39] or Wet'suwet'en Yin'tah;[40] and, as those differ from Haudenosaunee's,[41] Eeyou-Istchee's or Mi'kma'ki's. One thing most Indigenous legal and governance traditions have in common is their use of clans such as Anishinaabek's doodeman (though most are matrilineal like Gitx̱san's Wilps).[42]

Please note that the following list is not comprehensive and is missing quite a large number of legal systems.

Anishinaabe law[edit]

Anishinaabe laws stem from a large corpus of stories that create a narrative structure from which laws or ways of being (as a community and as an individual) were interpreted.[43] These histories include tales of Nanabozho and a wide spectrum of other beings and peoples, and the moral implications and practical applications gleaned from them.[44] Anishinaabe Law historically has interacted with the legal systems of other nations in examples like with the Gdoo-naaganinaa (Dish With One Spoon) Treaty made with the Haudenosaunee.[45]

Atikamekw law[edit]

Arising from their homeland, Nitaskinan, the Atikamekw Nation maintains a strong connection to their language[46] and to their traditional legal system, called either irakonikewin or orakonikewin.[47] Many differences arise between the English common law, the French civil code, and the Atikamekw irakonikewin, notably that of adoption, or opikihawasowin.[46] As of 2016, the governments of Québec and the Atikamekw Nation are resolving differences in legal standings with regard to adoption procedures,[46] which exists as a part of a larger scale effort at harmonizing the laws of and reconciling the Canadian State with Indigenous Nations.

Blackfoot law[edit]

The Blackfoot term Akak′stiman can be translated as "law-making."[48]

Dene law[edit]

Dene law describes the numerous legal traditions across the Dene homelands, collectively called Denendeh, whose territories include nations like the Gwich'in, Hän, Kaska, Tutchone, Sahtu, Dane-zaa, Dene Thá, Tłı̨chǫ, and Dënësųłı̨né, amongst others. Across Dene nations, it is understood that Dene laws were enacted by the cultural hero or heroes: Yamoria and Yamozha, often called the Great Lawmaker(s).[49][50] In some narratives, they are brothers, whereas in others, they are one man. The stories come from the era when humans co-existed with megafauna, and their law-making directed Dene relationships between humans and with nonhumans.[51]

Dene legal principles generally rest on the three foundations of equality, sharing, and reciprocity, as well as an interdependence on human and nonhuman life forces.[52] Legally and conceptually, Dene do not distinguish between human and nonhuman beings such as ravens, caribous, trees,[50] lakes, and mountains.[53] Interpreted stories often see Dene and nonhuman animals working together to find mutually beneficial solutions.[50] Indeed, there exists an almost treaty-like relationship between humans and many other beings, creating obligations on nonhuman animals and other beings to share their gifts with humans as humans are obligated to show respect through conservation and gratitude.[50] For example, Dene law stipulates that humans travelling across country must pay for their passage in the form of gifting things to waterways, landforms, and other beings such as ancestors.[54] Further, conceptions of care differ between Dene and English legal and social systems, particularly with children maturing in different social and environmental situations such as through apprenticeships and dutiful listening to storytellers.[55]

The differences between English law and Dene law have created significant friction between the Dene Nations and the Canadian State. One example is the rupturing of intergenerational transmission of law due to residential schools separated children from their social (and legal) frameworks.[55] Another is the difference in conservation understandings: Under common law, the Northwest Territories Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources sometimes promotes single-sex hunting activities, with posters detailing how to distinguish male from female caribou, directing hunters to target the males. English law, concerning the reproductive abilities of the herds, considers sex-selected hunting to be more sustainable whereas Dene law sees the potential in a rupture of knowledge transferral similar to killing off all the elder men of a community.[54] In contrast with the paternalistic English legal system wherein humans must oversee and conserve other species, the Dene worldview stresses the agency of nonhuman beings.[56] This results in situations where beings hunted or fished which, under English territorial law, must be left alone or thrown back clashes with the Dene legal institution of beings giving themselves to the hunters.[53]

As there exist many languages and cultures across Denendeh, so too are Dene legal systems called differently from one territory to the next. For example, Tłı̨chǫ refer to Dene law as Dǫ Nàowoòdeè,[57] Dena ÁʼNezen refers to Kaska law,[58] Dene Zhatıé law and stories is called Mek’ı̨́ı̨́ Dene Ts’elı̨ & Megǫndıé.[59][60]

Eeyou/Eenou law[edit]

The modern legal system of Eeyou Istchee has developed out of contact with the Canadian State, the province of Québec, and from the historical, traditional Eeyou ᐄᔨᔨᐤ or Eenou Eedouwin ᐄᓅ ᐃᐦᑐᐎᓐ (the Eeyou/Eenou way of doing things).[61][62]

Gitanyow law[edit]

The legal system of the Gitanyow is called Gitanyow Ayookxw.[63]

Gitx̱san law[edit]

The Gitx̱san set of laws is known as Ayokim Gitx̱san,[64] Ayookim Gitx̱san,[65] Ayookw,[66] or Ayook.[67]

Forming the most fundamental core of Gitx̱san society are the matrilineal "Houses"[68] or wilphl Gitx̱san, also called "Huwilp" (sing.: Wilp), which are each associated with one of the four P'deeḵ, or clans: Lax̱gibuu (Wolf), Lax Seel or Lax Ganeda (Raven/Frog), Giskaast (Fireweed), and Lax Skiik (Eagle).[64][65][67] Gitx̱san authority and jurisdiction, or Dax̱gyat, manifests through the wilphl Gitx̱san and their relationships with the Lax̱yip, their territories.[67] Gix̱san Lax̱yip, or Gitx̱san Country, maintains clear and distinct territorial jurisdictions associated with specific Huwilp, which are known and affirmed through what can be translated as treasures or inheritances, the gwalax̱ yee’nst.[65][67] The gwalax̱ yee'nst essentially define a Wilp, as these include not only the tangible, like one's wilnaatahl (or close relatives) and lax yiphl wilp (the lands and resources related to the Wilp), but also the intangible, such as potlatch seat names and the adaawx (oral histories), including "associated animal crests, symbols, limx oo’y (time immemorial songs), limx sinaahl (breath songs) and limx nox nok (spirit songs)."[65]

The whole of Gitx̱san society is woven together through the Ayookim Gitx̱san which dictate "the conduct of the Gitx̱san Huwilp around inheritance, marriage, adoption, access to property, trespass, injury, redress of injury,"[64] as well as citizenship, use of resources, conduct at potlatches, etc.[65] The backbone of the Ayookw are the adaawx (also spelled "adaawk") which sustain evidence for land ownership and social organization.[68] And, much like other coastal Cascadian First Nations, the central core political institution is the potlatch, or liligit.[65][67][68] "The Wilp Li’iliget is the Feast House and is seen as the Gitx̱san Parliament Building," and the "li’iliget take on different formats pending the type of Gitx̱san business or obligation to be fulfilled."[67]

Contemporarily, the Gitx̱san Nation has dealt with a fracturing political structure where the Indian Act band councils (with jurisdiction solely over the reserve lands) exists in contention with traditional governance structures. As such, and following the momentous 1997 Delgamuukw-Gisday’wa case, the wilphl Gitx̱san have coalesced into the Gitx̱san Huwilp Government.[65] Although the adaawk were not accepted as testimonial evidence during the Delgamuukw-Gisday'wa case, the precedence was set such that the "admissibility [of oral histories] must be determined on a case-by-case basis."[69][70][71] Rather than rendering inadmissible adaawx and other oral histories, there are now more defined structures by which such lines of evidence are accepted in Euro-Canadian courthouses.[69] The current restructuring of the Canadian legal environment is resulting in a relative re-empowerment of Gitx̱san Ayookim and governance, alongside other Indigenous legal structures.[3][4]

Haisla law[edit]

Haisla Nuuyum, or the Haisla way of life & laws, denotes and dictates ways of interacting within Haisla Country and alongside neighbouring territories and settled nations.[72] The Nuyuum underpins historical and contemporary forms of leadership, like the Chief and Council governing system, and guides governing responsibilities across the nation.[73]

Haudenosaunee law[edit]

Haudenosaunee flag displaying the Hiawatha Belt and representing the Great Law of Peace.[74]

As the oldest, continuously functioning representative democracy in the world, the Iroquoian Six Nations of the Longhouse, or the Haudenosaunee, confederated in an estimated 1142 C.E.[75] through the enacting of the Great Law of Peace (or Kaianere’kó:wa in Kanienʼkéha). The uniting of the original five nations (the Onödowáʼga:/Seneca, the Gayogo̱hó:nǫʼ/Cayuga, the Onyota'a:ka/Oneida, the Onöñda’gaga’/Onondaga, and the Kanienʼkehá:ka/Mohawk), and thus the core legal framework, is recounted orally from the constitutional wampum, and is symbolized by the Tree of Peace, the eastern white pine.[76]

The laws are transmitted by means of symbolic wampum and are divided into 117 articles in total. The transmission is done yearly by orally recounting the confederation narrative. This narrative conveys the travels and history of the Great Peacemaker, Jigonhsasee, and Hiawatha as they brought peace to Haudenosaunee Country. Through them, governmental structures and legal institutions were created to metaphorically, socially, economically, and concretely unite families. As such, nations are conceived as elder and younger brothers, and when asked how this new structure would work, the Peacemaker replied, "It will take the form of the longhouse in which there are many hearths, one for each family, yet all live as one household under one chief mother. They shall have one mind and live under one law. Thinking will replace killing, and there shall be one commonwealth."[77]

Inuit law[edit]

Traditional forms of Inuit justice understand the interconnected nature of things. Leaders and Elders do not see themselves as agents of social control or law and order, as each individual contributes to the functioning of the community. The word for Inuit Law in Inuktitut is ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit from the root "qaujima- ᖃᐅᔨᒪ-" meaning "to know," and could be literally translated as "that which has long been known by Inuit." It is also rendered as Qauyimayatuqangit (ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ) or ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓂᑐᖃᖏᑦ Qaujimanituqangit.

The integration of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (or IQ) and Canadian Law is an ongoing process. For example, the Nunavut Court of Justice is the only "unified," single-level court in Canada, and the court travels to communities every six weeks to two years. There are also on-the-land and contemporary healing circle programs administered.[78]

Ktunaxa law[edit]

The fundamental, underlying concept of Ktunaxa law (or Ɂaknumu¢tiŧiŧ) is that the Ktunaxa people arose from the land of their traditional country, Ktunaxa ɁamakɁis, where they remain keepers of the land, obligated to care for and respect the land and all things on it, living and nonliving.[79] Ɂaknumu¢tiŧiŧ, as the law of the land, thus dictates Ktunaxa must protect and not overuse the land, ultimately maintaining balance in the understanding that all things are connected, as the land gives resources for survival.[79]

Kwakwaka'wakw law[edit]

Coming out of their traditional homeland, Kwakwa̱ka̱'wakw A̱wi'nagwis, the Kwakwa̱ka̱ʼwakw legal system remains administered through the potlatch institution, despite the Potlatch Ban which endured from 1884 to 1951. Like many other northern Cascadia coastal nations, the Kwakwa̱ka̱ʼwakw nation and its numerous community subdivisions, such as the Kwaguʼł, ʼNa̱mg̱is, and Dzawa̱da̱ʼenux̱w (amongst many others), maintain a complex body of laws surrounding property rights of "treasures," namely songs, dances, coppers, regalia, names, crests, filled boxes, stories, and knowledge.[80][81] In contradistinction with European legal systems, Kwakwa̱ka̱ʼwakw law understands societal structures as well as individual rights and obligations differently.[80][81] Stories, songs, dances, and knowledge are passed down and traded through specific potlatch rituals, and dispute resolution occurs through ceremonies often done in big houses by specific, knowledgeable community leaders or Elders.[80][81] As such, intellectual and property law differs markedly from Euro-Canadian legal systems, and conflict is still being resolved from the near-century long ban of a core institution.[80][81] The Canadian State is currently in the process of reconciling its laws and historical policies with the Kwakwa̱ka̱ʼwakw Nation.[80][81][82][83]

Métis law[edit]

La lway michif, or Métis law, is derived from a blending of legal traditions between the Indigenous nations of the prairies, the European Canadians who settled in what would become the Métis homeland (Michif Piyii), and Christianity. As Métis culture is an oral culture, there remains a distinction between written and oral forms of Métis law, as most protocols surrounding the family and community continue to be exclusively transmitted orally.[84][85]

The core foundation of Métis law rests upon inherited stories, such as of Ti-Jean, Wisahkecahk, and Nanbush,[86][87][85] and ultimately centres the family, from which extend powers to the community, regional, and national levels where decisions are made by assembly.[84][85] Elders function as mediators and advisors within the Métis legal structure, and ceremonies hold a core institutional rule.[84][85] Justice is underlined by individual and communal rights where judicial decisions are obligated to be made in the context of a relationship of respect and trust.[84][85] Dispute resolution hinges on being non-adversarial; decision-making is by consensus with universal suffrage with the whole community deciding on rules and limits to authority.[84][85] Specific social structures also dictate certain functions, such as the correction of misbehaviour falling to godparents and grandparents, with male youth often being sent to live with uncles if problems persist, and women in charge of welcoming and protecting newcomers, with women's committees responsible for resolving cases of domestic violence.[84][85] Historically, the Métis legal system included a general council in charge of supervising a policing organization called la garde.[84][85]

Mi'kmaw law[edit]

Mi'kma'ki is home to Netukulimk which is "the use of the natural bounty provided by the Creator for the self-support and well-being of the individual and the community. A foundation of Netukulimk is achieving adequate standards of community nutrition and economic well-being without jeopardizing the integrity, diversity, or productivity of our environment."[88] Within the conceptual framework of Netukulimk, Mi'kmaw law functions as the foundation of sustaining Mi'kmaw families, communities, and society.[89] This mindset understands the whole of life to be interconnected, describing the rights and responsibilities of the Mi’kmaq with their families, communities, nation, and eco-system.[90]

Nêhiyaw law[edit]

In the nêhiyaw language, "Cree laws" most directly translates as ᓀᐦᐃᔭᐤ ᐃᐧᔭᓯᐁᐧᐃᐧᓇ nêhiyaw wiyasowêwina which hosts the root /-asiw-/ meaning "to decide, judge, command." However, the more appropriate term when referencing Cree––or specifically Plains Cree (nêhiyaw)––law is Wahkohtowin (ᐋᐧᐦᑰᐦᑐᐃᐧᐣ) denoting both kinship and codes of conduct flowing from one's own role within their community.

Secwépemc law[edit]

In Secwepemcúl'ecw, the Shuswap people still maintain yirí7 re stsq’ey’s-kucw, also rendered as yerí7 re stsq̓ey̓s-kucw, meaning "our laws and customs."[91] Secwépemc law, or Stsq̓ey, is understood through the stseptékwll (ancient oral histories) as being gifted to the Secwépemc by Sk’elép (Coyote). Stsq'ey governs the nation predominately through three fundamental laws:

  • Secwepemc law of sovereignty (including the authority to make treaties);
  • Secwepemc law that defines rights and access to resources and;
  • Secwepemc laws of social and environmental responsibility (caretakership).[92]

Syilx law[edit]

Born from nxʷəlxʷəltantət, or Okanagan Country, Syilx law is defined through captikwł, "a collection of teachings about Syilx Okanagan laws, customs, values, governance structures and principles that, together, define and inform Syilx Okanagan rights and responsibilities to the land and to our culture."[93]

Tŝilhqot'in law[edit]

The name for Tŝilhqot'in law is Dechen Ts’edilhtan.[94][95]

Wet'suwet'en law[edit]

After conflict at the frontiers of Wet'suwet'en Country in British Columbia,[96][97] the BC and Canadian governments signed a memorandum of understanding with the Wet'suwet'en Nation's hereditary chiefs in May 2020. The memorandum begins with these first two points:

  1. "Canada and B.C. recognize that Wet’suwet’en rights and title are held by the Wet’suwet’en houses under their system of governance."
  2. "Canada and B.C. recognize Wet’suwet’en aboriginal rights and title throughout the Yintah [traditional territory]."[98]

This memorandum affirms Anak Nu'at'en (or Inuk Nuatden as spelled by the MoU) as the Wet'suwet'en legal system of governance. The Wet'suwet'en system of governance is intimately tied to the hereditary chiefdom. Clan structures and governing chiefs are, in turn, intimately tied to Yin'tah, their lands.[99]

W̱SÁNEĆ law[edit]

Emerging from the land, or TEṈEW̱, the W̱SÁNEĆ term SKÁLS means both "law" and "beliefs."[100]

Areas of law[edit]

Aboriginal law[edit]

Aboriginal law is the area of law related to the Canadian Government's relationship with its Indigenous peoples (First Nations, Métis and Inuit). Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867 gives the federal parliament exclusive power to legislate in matters related to Aboriginals, which includes groups governed by the Indian Act, different Numbered Treaties and outside of those Acts.[101]

Administrative law[edit]

Canadian administrative law is the body of law that addresses the actions and operations of governments and governmental agencies.[102]

Contract law[edit]

Individual provinces have codified some principles of contract law in a Sale of Goods Act, which was modeled on early English versions. Outside of Quebec, most contract law is still common law, based on the rulings of judges in contract litigation over the years. Quebec, being a civil law jurisdiction, does not have contract law, but rather has its own law of obligations.[103]

Constitutional law[edit]

Constitutional law is the area of Canadian law relating to the interpretation and application of the Constitution of Canada by the Courts.[104] This is represented in the Constitution Act, 1867, Constitution Act, 1982 and Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Copyright law[edit]

Copyright law of Canada governs the legally enforceable rights to creative and artistic works under the laws of Canada.[105]

Criminal law[edit]

Canadian Criminal Cases collection

Criminal law in Canada falls under the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the federal government. The power to enact criminal law is derived from section 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867.[106] Most criminal laws have been codified in the Criminal Code, as well as the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, Youth Criminal Justice Act, and several other peripheral Acts.

The provinces are responsible for the administration of justice, including criminal trials within their respective provinces, despite their inability to enact criminal laws.[107] Provinces do have the power to promulgate quasi-criminal or regulatory offences in a variety of administrative and other areas, and every province has done so with myriad rules and regulations across a broad spectrum.[108]

Evidence law[edit]

The Canada Evidence Act is an Act of the Parliament of Canada, first passed in 1893, that regulates the rules of evidence in court proceedings under federal law.[109] Each province also has its own evidence statute, governing the law of evidence in civil proceedings in the province.

Family law[edit]

Family law in Canada concerns the body of Canadian law dealing with family relationship, marriage, and divorce.[110] The federal government has exclusive jurisdiction over the substance of marriage and divorce. Provinces have exclusive jurisdiction over the procedures surrounding marriage. Provinces also have laws dealing with marital property and with family maintenance (including spousal support).

Human Rights Law[edit]

There are currently four key mechanisms in Canada to protect human rights: the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and provincial human rights laws and legislation.[111]

Immigration and refugee law[edit]

Canadian immigration and refugee law concerns the area of law related to the admission of foreign nationals into Canada, their rights and responsibilities once admitted, and the conditions of their removal.[112] The primary law on these matters is in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Inheritance law[edit]

Inheritance law in Canada is constitutionally a provincial matter. Therefore, the laws governing inheritance in Canada are legislated by each individual province.

Insolvency law of Canada[edit]

The Parliament of Canada has exclusive jurisdiction to regulate matters relating to bankruptcy and insolvency, by virtue of s.91 of the Constitution Act, 1867. It has passed some statutes as a result, i.e., The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act ("BIA") and the Winding-Up and Restructuring Act (which essentially applies only to financial institutions under federal jurisdiction). In applying these statutes, provincial law has important consequences. Section 67(1)(b) of the BIA provides that "any property that as against the bankrupt is exempt from execution or seizure under any laws applicable in the province within which the property is situated and within which the bankrupt resides" is not divisible among their creditors.[113] Provincial legislation under the property and civil rights power of the Constitution Act, 1867 regulates the resolution of financial difficulties that occur before the onset of insolvency.

Labour and employment law[edit]

Canadian labour law is that body of law which regulates the rights, restrictions obligations of trade unions, workers and employers in Canada. Canadian employment law is that body of law which regulates the rights, restrictions obligations of non-unioned workers and employers in Canada.[114] Most labour regulation in Canada is conducted at the provincial level by government agencies and boards. However, certain industries under federal regulation are subject solely to federal labour legislation and standards.

Patent law[edit]

Canadian patent law is the legal system regulating the granting of patents for inventions within Canada, and the enforcement of these rights in Canada.[115]

Procedural law[edit]

The functioning of the Courts is regulated by the laws of civil procedure which are codified in each province's civil procedures rules.

Property law[edit]

Property law in Canada is the body of law concerning the rights of individuals over land, objects, and expression within Canada. It encompasses personal property, real property, and intellectual property.[116]

Tort law[edit]

Tort law in Canada concerns the treatment of the law of torts within the Canadian jurisdiction excluding Quebec, which is covered by the law of obligations. [117]

Trademark law[edit]

Canada's trademark law provides protection for distinctive marks, certification marks, distinguishing guises, and proposed marks against those who appropriate the goodwill of the mark or create confusion between different vendors' goods or services.[118]

Judicial system[edit]

Canadian court system (Source Canadian Department of Justice)

Under the Constitution Act, 1867, the federal Parliament and the provincial legislatures both have the constitutional authority to create courts: Parliament under s. 101, and the Provinces under s. 92(14).[119] However, the federal power to create courts is much more limited than the provincial power. The provincial courts have a much more extensive jurisdiction, including the constitutionally entrenched power to determine constitutional issues.

The Supreme Court of Canada (French: Cour suprême du Canada) is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeal in the Canadian justice system. Parliament created it by Act of Parliament in 1875, as a "general court of appeal for Canada".[120] Prior to 1949, cases could be appealed to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the United Kingdom, and some cases bypassed the Supreme Court of Canada entirely.[120]

Other than the Supreme Court, the Canadian court system is divided into two classes of courts:[121] superior courts of general jurisdiction, and courts of limited jurisdiction, sometimes referred to as inferior courts. The superior courts, created and maintained by the provinces, are divided into superior courts of original jurisdiction and superior courts of appeal. These courts are sometimes also referred to as "Section 96" courts, in reference to s. 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which grants the federal government the power to appoint the judges of these courts.[16] As courts of general jurisdiction, the provincial superior courts of original jurisdiction have jurisdiction over all matters, under both federal and provincial law, unless the matter has been assigned to some other court or administrative agency by a statute passed by the appropriate legislative body. The superior courts of original jurisdiction have an extensive civil jurisdiction, under both federal and provincial laws. Under the Criminal Code, a federal statute, they have jurisdiction over the most serious criminal offences, such as murder.[122] They also hear appeals from the Provincial Courts in criminal matters and some civil matters. A further appeal normally lies to superior court of appeal, the highest court in each province.[123]

The provinces also can establish courts of limited jurisdiction, whose jurisdiction is limited solely to what is included in the statutory grant of jurisdiction. These courts are often called "Provincial Courts", even though the superior courts established by the provinces are also provincial courts. The Provincial Courts have an extensive criminal jurisdiction under the Criminal Code, a federal statute, and also typically have a limited civil jurisdiction in matters under provincial jurisdiction, such as small claims and some family matters. The judges of the Provincial Courts are appointed by the provincial governments.[124]

There are also additional federal courts established by Parliament, which have a specialised jurisdiction in certain areas of federal law. These courts are the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Tax Court of Canada, and the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ "Where our legal system comes from - About Canada's System of Justice". 7 September 2016.
  2. ^ John Dickinson; Brian Young (2014). A Short History of Quebec. McGill-Queen's University Press. p. 59. ISBN 978-0-7735-7530-1.
  3. ^ a b Anaya, James (2007). "Indigenous Law and Its Contribution to Global Pluralism". Indigenous Law Journal. HeinOnline. 6 (1): 3–12. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  4. ^ a b Hunt, Sarah Elizabeth (2014). Witnessing the Colonialscape: lighting the intimate fires of Indigenous legal pluralism (PhD). Simon Fraser University. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
  5. ^ Patrick Malcolmson; Richard Myers; Gerald Baier; Tom Bateman (2016). The Canadian Regime: An Introduction to Parliamentary Government in Canada, Sixth Edition. University of Toronto Press. pp. 75–76. ISBN 978-1-4426-3598-2.
  6. ^ Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11, s 52.
  7. ^ Richard W. Bauman; Tsvi Kahana (2006). The Least Examined Branch: The Role of Legislatures in the Constitutional State. Cambridge University Press. p. 159. ISBN 978-1-139-46040-8.
  8. ^ Craik 94
  9. ^ Craik 96
  10. ^ Craik 98
  11. ^ Frederick Lee Morton (2002). Law, Politics and the Judicial Process in Canada. University of Calgary Press. p. 216. ISBN 978-1-55238-046-8.
  12. ^ Craik 105
  13. ^ a b OECD (2007). Linking Regions and Central Governments Contracts for Regional Development: Contracts for Regional Development. OECD Publishing. p. 173. ISBN 978-92-64-00875-5.
  14. ^ Munroe Eagles; Larry Johnston (2008). Politics: An Introduction to Modern Democratic Government. University of Toronto Press. p. 262. ISBN 978-1-55111-858-1.
  15. ^ Craik 125
  16. ^ a b Patrick N. Malcolmson; Richard Myers (2009). The Canadian Regime: An Introduction to Parliamentary Government in Canada. University of Toronto Press. p. 149. ISBN 978-1-4426-0047-8.
  17. ^ Craik 127
  18. ^ Craik 127–128
  19. ^ Craik 131
  20. ^ Craik 119
  21. ^ Constitution Act, 1867: Distribution of Legislative Powers.
  22. ^ Statutory Instrument Act
  23. ^ "Canada Gazette – About Us". Gazette.gc.ca. 2010-06-09. Archived from the original on 2011-07-06. Retrieved 2011-02-28.
  24. ^ Legislation Revision and Consolidation Act
  25. ^ Dennis Campbell; Susan Cotter (1998). Comparative Law Yearbook. Kluwer Law International. p. 234. ISBN 978-90-411-0740-4.
  26. ^ Richard A. Mann (2013). Business Law and the Regulation of Business. Cengage Learning. p. 7. ISBN 978-1-133-58757-6.
  27. ^ Robert A. Battram (2010). Canada In Crisis...: An Agenda to Unify the Nation. Trafford Publishing. p. 26. ISBN 978-1-4269-8062-6.
  28. ^ Graeme R. Newman (30 October 2010). Crime and Punishment around the World: [Four Volumes]. ABC-CLIO. p. 77. ISBN 978-0-313-35134-1.
  29. ^ a b Ian Bushnell (1992). Captive Court: A Study of the Supreme Court of Canada. McGill-Queen's Press – MQUP. p. 53. ISBN 978-0-7735-6301-8.
  30. ^ a b Frederick Lee Morton (2002). Law, Politics and the Judicial Process in Canada. University of Calgary Press. p. 389. ISBN 978-1-55238-046-8.
  31. ^ A Compendium of Law and Judges[dead link]
  32. ^ J. M. Smits (2012). Elgar Encyclopedia of Comparative Law. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 132. ISBN 978-1-78100-610-8.
  33. ^ Aseniwuche Winewak Nation; University of Victoria Law; Indigenous Bar Associations; Law Foundation of Ontario; Truth and Reconciliation Commission. "Accessing Justice and Reconciliation: A Cree Legal Summary". Retrieved 24 December 2018.
  34. ^ Ignace, Marianne; Ignace, Ronald E (October 2017). Secwépemc People, Land, and Laws – Yerí7 re stsq̓ey̓s-kucw. Secwepemcúl̓ecw, Canada: McGill-Queen's University Press. p. 624. ISBN 9780773551305.
  35. ^ "Who We Are". Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑕᐱᕇᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ. Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑕᐱᕇᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ. Retrieved 24 December 2018.
  36. ^ Smith, Shirleen (1999). "Dene Treaties, Anthropology and Colonial Relationships". University of Alberta Department of Anthropology. Retrieved 24 December 2018.
  37. ^ "Tlingit Law, American Justice and the Destruction of Tlingit Villages". Vimeo. Sealaska Heritage InstituteP. 20 November 2012. Retrieved 24 December 2018.
  38. ^ Williams, Jackie. "Lingit kusteeyì: What my Grandfather taught me". Taku River Tlingit Place Names. Taku River Tlingit First Nation. Retrieved 24 December 2018. A Tlingit history as recounted by Jackie Williams, Wolf Clan Leader, Taku River Tlingit First Nation
  39. ^ "Our Way: The Traditional System Today". Gitxsan. Gitx̱san Nation. Retrieved 24 December 2018.
  40. ^ "Wet'suwet'en People". Unist'ot'en Camp. Unist'ot'en. Retrieved 24 December 2018.
  41. ^ "Haudenosaunee Confederacy". Haudenosaunee Confederacy. Haudenosaunee. Retrieved 24 December 2018.
  42. ^ "Our Way: The Wilp". Gitxsan. Gitx̱san Nation. Retrieved 24 December 2018.
  43. ^ "Traditional First Law of the Anishinaabe". Little Shell Pembina Nation. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  44. ^ "Accessing Justice and Reconciliation: AnishinabekLegal Summary". AnishinabekLegal Traditions Report. Indigenous Law Research Unit at the University of Victoria. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  45. ^ Simpson, Leanne (2008). "Looking after Gdoo-Naaganinaa: Precolonial Nishnaabeg Diplomatic and Treaty Relationships". Wicazo Sa Review. University of Minnesota Press. 23 (2): 29–42. doi:10.1353/wic.0.0001. S2CID 159947259.
  46. ^ a b c Conseil de la Nation Atikamekw (22 November 2016). "Mémoire portant sur le project de loi 113 : Loi modifiant le Code civil et d'autres dispositions législatives en matière d'adoption et de communication de renseignements" (PDF) (Press release). Nitaskinan, Québec, Canada: Assemblée nationale du Québec. Commission des institutions. Retrieved 14 January 2022.
  47. ^ "loi". Atikamekw Dictionnaire. Atikamekw Nation. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  48. ^ Crowshoe, Reg; Manneschmidt, Sybille (2002). Akak'stiman: a Blackfoot framework for decision-making and mediation processes (2nd ed.). Calgary, AB, Canada: University of Calgary Press. ISBN 978-1-55238-044-4. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  49. ^ "Yamǫ́rıa". Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre. NWT Ministry of Education, Culture and Employment. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  50. ^ a b c d Chartrand, Larry (18 December 2018). "8 - Applying Dene Law to Genetic Resources Access and Knowledge Issues". In Oguamanam, Chidi (ed.). Genetic Resources, Justice and Reconciliation: Canada and Global Access and Benefit Sharing. Cambridge, England, UK: Cambridge University Press. pp. 138–156. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  51. ^ Campbell, Daniel. "The Hero of the Dene". Up Here: The Voice of Canada's Far North. Up Here Publishing. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  52. ^ "Dene Principles & Values". Dehcho First Nations. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  53. ^ a b Walsh, David (2015). "The Nature of Food: Indigenous Dene Foodways and Ontologies in the Era of Climate Change". Religion and Food, Scripta Instituti Donneriani Aboensis. Gettysburg College. 26: 225–249. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  54. ^ a b Dokis, Carly A. (1 July 2015). Where the Rivers Meet: Pipelines, Participatory Resource Management, and Aboriginal-State Relations in the Northwest Territories. Vancouver, BC, Canada: UBC Press. ISBN 9780774828468.
  55. ^ a b Nahanni, Phoebe (July 1992). Dene Women in the Traditional and Modern Northern Economy in Denendeh, Northwest Territories, Canada (PDF) (Master of Arts). McGill University. Retrieved 14 Jan 2022.
  56. ^ Walsh, David (2016). "Feeding the Fire: Food and Reciprocity Among the Dene" (PDF). Religious Studies and Theology. Sheffield, UK: Equinox Publishing Ltd: 123–130. doi:10.1558/rsth.v35i2.32548. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  57. ^ "Yamǫǫ̀zha - Dene Laws". Tlicho History. Tlicho Government. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  58. ^ Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society (October 2020). "Kaska: Gūdené' K'éh Gūs'ānī: Dene 'A ̄Nezen ́Gedi' G ̄ūtīe Sū'aį ́ dege. / English: Following Our Peoples' Way: Building a Circle of Dignity and Justice". Upholding Dignity & Justice: Kaska Advocates Training 2019 - 2020 (PDF) (Report). Kaska Dena Keyeh: Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society. p. 44. Retrieved 14 January 2022.
  59. ^ "Mek'ı̨́ı̨́ Dene Ts'elı̨ & Megǫndıé – Dene Laws & Stories". Dehcho First Nations. Dehcho First Nations. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  60. ^ Dene Law & Stories- Mek’ı̨́ı̨́ Dene Ts’elı̨ & Megǫndıé - Dehcho First Nations (Video) (in English and Slave). Denendeh: YouTube. 1 June 2020. Event occurs at 14:35. Retrieved 14 January 2022.
  61. ^ Cree-Naskapi Commission (2018). Report of the Cree-Naskapi Commission (Report). Retrieved 14 January 2022.
  62. ^ Cree Nation Government (10 March 2015). Eeyou (Cree) Governance: A Brief Account (PDF) (Report). BC Treaty Commission. Retrieved 14 January 2022.
  63. ^ "Wilp System". Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs. Gitanyow Chiefs Office. Retrieved 23 January 2022.
  64. ^ a b c "The Gitxsan Experience with Mineral Exploration" (PDF). Minerals North. Gitxsan Hereditary Chiefs. 2007. Retrieved 23 January 2022.
  65. ^ a b c d e f g Sebastian, Gordon, ed. (March 2019). "Gitxsan March Newsletter" (PDF). Gald’m Mahlasxw (Spread the Word). Gitx̱san Lax̱yip: Huwilp Gitxsan Government. Retrieved 22 January 2022.
  66. ^ "Middle Skeen Laxyip Strategic Engagement Agreement". Agreement of 9 June 2019 (PDF). Middle Skeena Watershed Simgigyat, Gitxsan Treaty Society, & the Province of British Columbia. Retrieved 22 January 2022.
  67. ^ a b c d e f Implementation of the Wilp Task Group; Wilson, Art; Patsey, Gary G. (2 March 2004). A Preliminary Report - Inside the Gitxsan, the Gwalax̱ Yee'nst: A cursory description of innate traditional Gitxsan processes, structure, and teachings (PDF) (Report). Hazelton, Gitx̱san Lax̱yip, B.C., Canada: Gitxsan Treaty Society. pp. 1–38. Retrieved 22 January 2022.
  68. ^ a b c Napoleon, Val (18 July 2014). "Delgamuukw : A Legal Straightjacket for Oral Histories?". Canadian Journal of Law and Society. Cambridge University Press. 20 (2): 123–155. doi:10.1353/jls.2006.0025.
  69. ^ a b Lysyk, Stephanie P. (October 2006). Evidentiary issues—oral tradition evidence (PDF) (Technical report). Aboriginal Law: Procedural and Dispute Resolution Issues. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
  70. ^ RAVEN (30 October 2012). "Mitchell v. Canada". RAVEN Trust. RAVEN. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  71. ^ "Mitchell v. M.N.R.". Case No. 1 SCR 911 of 2001. Supreme Court of Canada.
  72. ^ Morin, Brandi. "Once managing poverty, Haisla Nation now manages wealth". Canada's National Observer. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  73. ^ Green, Kundoqk Jacquie Louise (2013). “Learning Haisla Nuuyum through stories about traditional territory, feasting and lifestyles (PDF) (PhD). University of Victoria. Retrieved 14 January 2022.
  74. ^ "Hiawatha Belt". Onondaga Nation. Onondaga Nation. 18 June 2014. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  75. ^ McClure, Bruce (July 15, 2019). "The Eclipse That Marked The Start Of The Iroquois Confederacy". EarthSky. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  76. ^ "Kayanlaˀ Kówa – Great Law of Peace". Oneida. Oneida Nation. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  77. ^ Paul A. Wallace, The White Roots of Peace, Saranac Lake, New York: The Chauncy Press, 1986
  78. ^ "The Traditional Inuit Justice System" (PDF). Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  79. ^ a b "Qat'muk Declaration" (PDF). Ktunaxa. Ktunaxa Nation. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  80. ^ a b c d e Bell, Lucy (2006). "Indigenous Law Journal/Volume 5/Fall 2006 119Kwakwaka'wakw Laws and Perspectives Regarding Property". Indigenous Law Journal. 5: 119–159. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  81. ^ a b c d e Udy, Vanessa (2008). Victory Through Honour: Reconciling Canadian Intellectual Property Laws and Kwakwaka’wakw Cultural Property Laws (PDF) (Master of Laws). McGill University. Retrieved 14 January 2022.
  82. ^ Wilson-Raybould, Jody (September 13, 2018). Recognition, Reconciliation and Indigenous People’s Disproportionate Interactions with the Criminal Justice System (Speech). Inaugural Houston Lecture. Johnson Shoyama Graduate School at the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Treaty 6 & Michif Piyii, Canada: Government of Canada. Retrieved 14 January 2022.{{cite speech}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  83. ^ Szklarski, Cassandra (1 March 2019). "The significance of Jody Wilson-Raybould invoking Indigenous 'Big House' laws". CTV News. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  84. ^ a b c d e f g Lawrence Barkwell (October 7, 2004). "Exploring Indigenous Legal TraditionsRoundtable". Customary Law and Legal Traditions of the Metis (Report). University of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Treaty 1, Canada: Law Commission of Canada. Retrieved 14 January 2022.{{cite report}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  85. ^ a b c d e f g h Barkwell, Lawrence J.; Acco, Anne Carrière; Rozyk, Amanda. "The Origins of Metis Customary Law With a Discussion of Metis Legal Traditions". The Virtual Museum of Métis History and Culture. Gabriel Dumont Institute of Native Studies and Applied Research. Archived from the original on 30 October 2020. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  86. ^ "Métis Culture and Language". Indigenous Saskatchewan Encyclopedia. University of Saskatchewan. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  87. ^ Pelletier, Jeanne. "Three Cousins". The Virtual Museum of Métis History and Culture. Gabriel Dumont Institute of Native Studies and Applied Research. Retrieved 15 January 2022.
  88. ^ "Netukulimk". UINR. Unama’ki Institute of Natural Resources. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  89. ^ Baxter, Joan. "What "netukulimk" means and how it applies to the moderate livelihood fishery". Halifax Examiner. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  90. ^ "Law". Tepi'ketuek Mi'kmaw Archives. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  91. ^ Ignace, Marianne; Ignace, Ronald Eric (2017). Secwépemc people, land, and laws – Yerí7 re Stsq̓ey̓s-kucw. Montréal, QC, Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
  92. ^ "Stsq'ey (Laws and Jurisdiction)". SecwepemcStrong. Secwépemc Nation. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  93. ^ "captíkwł". Syilx Okanagan Nation Alliance. Okanagan Nation Alliance. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  94. ^ Weir, Lorraine (28 March 2015). ""Oral Tradition" as Legal Fiction: The Challenge of Dechen Ts'edilhtan in Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia". International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique. 29: 159–89. doi:10.1007/s11196-015-9419-8. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  95. ^ Hanna, Alan Bruce (2020). Dechen ts'edilhtan: Implementing Tsilhqot’in Law for Watershed Governance (PDF) (PhD). University of Victoria. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
  96. ^ Kestler-D'Amours, Jillian (1 Mar 2020). "Understanding the Wet'suwet'en struggle in Canada". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  97. ^ Bursey, David; Curpen, Radha; Singh, Sharon; Teal, Charlotte. "Memorandum of Understanding on Wet'suwet'en Rights and Title—An Ambitious Plan". Bennett Jones. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  98. ^ "Memorandum of Understanding between Canada, British Columbia and Wet'suwet'en as agreed on February 29, 2020" (PDF). Government of British Columbia. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  99. ^ "Governance Structure". Unist'ot'en Camp. Unist'ot'en. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
  100. ^ Clifford, Robert (YELḰÁTŦE). "Saanich Law and the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion". Centre for International Governance Innovation. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  101. ^ Christian Leuprecht; Peter H. Russell (2011). Essential Readings in Canadian Constitutional Politics. University of Toronto Press. p. 477. ISBN 978-1-4426-0368-4.
  102. ^ Robert Leckey (2008). Contextual Subjects: Family, State and Relational Theory. University of Toronto Press. p. 143. ISBN 978-0-8020-9749-1.
  103. ^ Simon N. M. Young (2009). Civil Forfeiture of Criminal Property. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 176. ISBN 978-1-84844-621-2.
  104. ^ Leuprecht/Russell, 2011. p. 451.
  105. ^ Lesley Ellen Harris (2001). Canadian Copyright Law. McGraw-Hill Ryerson. p. 15. ISBN 978-0-07-560369-6.
  106. ^ Michelle G. Grossman; Julian V. Roberts (2011). Criminal Justice in Canada: A Reader. Cengage Learning. p. 2. ISBN 978-0-17-650228-7.
  107. ^ H. Stephen Harris (2001). Competition Laws Outside the United States: Supplement. American Bar Association. p. 2. ISBN 978-1-57073-881-4.
  108. ^ Kevin Heller; Markus Dubber (2010). The Handbook of Comparative Criminal Law. Stanford University Press. p. 99. ISBN 978-0-8047-7729-2.
  109. ^ Canada; James Crankshaw (1910). The Criminal Code of Canada and the Canada Evidence Act as Amended to Date. Carswell Company. p. intro.
  110. ^ Malcolm C. Kronby (2010). Canadian Family Law. John Wiley and Sons. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-470-67647-9.
  111. ^ Alan Price (2007). Human Resource Management in a Business Context. Cengage Learning EMEA. p. 391. ISBN 978-1-84480-548-8.
  112. ^ John Powell (2009). Encyclopedia of North American Immigration. Infobase Publishing. p. 362. ISBN 978-1-4381-1012-7.
  113. ^ "Consolidated federal laws of canada, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act". November 2019.
  114. ^ "Acts and Regulations". Archived from the original on 2013-07-23. Retrieved 2013-07-27.
  115. ^ Thomas F. Cotter (21 March 2013). Comparative Patent Remedies: A Legal and Economic Analysis. Oxford University Press. pp. 166–167. ISBN 978-0-19-984065-6.
  116. ^ Stuart C. McCormack (1999). Intellectual Property Law of Canada. Juris Publishing, Inc. p. 11. ISBN 978-1-57823-070-9.
  117. ^ Jean Louis Baudouin; Allen M. Linden (2010). Tort Law in Canada. Kluwer Law International. ISBN 978-90-411-3373-1.
  118. ^ Borden Ladner Gervias LLP (2011). Trade-Mark Practice in Canada. Borden Ladner Gervais LLP. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-9730750-5-2.
  119. ^ Augustus Henry Frazer Lefroy (2005). Canada's Federal System: Being a Treatise on Canadian Constitutional Law Under the British North America Act. The Lawbook Exchange. p. 151. ISBN 978-1-58477-591-1.
  120. ^ a b Ian Bushnell (1997). The Federal Court of Canada: A History, 1875–1992. University of Toronto Press. pp. 234–237. ISBN 978-0-8020-4207-1.
  121. ^ Peter H. Russell (2007). Canada's Trial Courts: Two Tiers Or One?. University of Toronto Press. p. 32. ISBN 978-0-8020-9323-3.
  122. ^ Michel Proulx; David Layton (2001). Ethics and Canadian criminal law. Irwin Law. p. 153. ISBN 978-1-55221-044-4.
  123. ^ International Business Publications, USA (2008). Canada Company Laws and Regulations Handbook. Int'l Business Publications. p. 36. ISBN 978-1-4330-6959-8.
  124. ^ Gerhard Robbers (2006). Encyclopedia of World Constitutions. Infobase Publishing. p. 169. ISBN 978-0-8160-6078-8.

Bibliography[edit]

  • Craik, Neil; Forcese, Craig; Bryden, Philip; Carver, Peter; Haigh, Richard; Ratushny, Ed; Sullivan, Ruth, eds. (2006). Public Law: Cases, materials, and commentary. Toronto: Emond Montgomery Publications Limited. ISBN 1-55239-185-X.

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]