Search Results (203)
Documents on indians native populations
Show: results per page
|Daniels v. Canada (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development), 2013 FC 6|
Stephanie Axmann, Thomas Isaac; McCarthy Tétrault LLP;
March 19, 2013, previously published on March 18, 2013On January 8, 2013, the Federal Court of Canada (FCC) released its reasons in Harry Daniels, Gabriel Daniels, Leah Gardner, Terry Joudrey and the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples v. Her Majesty the Queen, as represented by the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and the Attorney...
|BIA Issues Final Regulations Governing Residental, Business, and Wind and Solar Resource Leasing on Indian Lands|
Modrall Sperling Roehl Harris Sisk P.A.;
March 8, 2013, previously published on Winter 2013The Revised Rule: On November 27, 2012, the Bureau of Indian Affairs issued the long-awaited and substantially revised regulations addressing non-agricultural surface leasing of Indian land under the Indian Long Term Leasing Act.
|Grand Canyon Sky Watch, Arizona Federal Court Addresses Arbitration Enforcebility:|
Modrall Sperling Roehl Harris Sisk P.A.;
March 8, 2013, previously published on Spring 2013The Case: The order entered February 13, 2013, in Grand Canyon Skywalk Development, LLC v. ‘Sa' Nyu Wa, Inc. reflects important principles supporting the enforceability of arbitration awards when a dispute arises in economic development in Indian country.
|Federal Court Declares Métis and Non-Status Indians to be “Indians”|
Amy Gauthier, Pierre-Christian Labeau; Norton Rose Canada LLP;
January 28, 2013, previously published on January 2013On January 8, the Federal Court issued a declaration that Métis and non-status Indians in Canada are “Indians” within the meaning of subsection 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867. Non-status Indians and Métis are Aboriginal groups that do not have any status under the...
|The Department of the Interior Issues New Rules Regulating the Leasing of Tribal Lands|
Snell Wilmer L.L.P.;
December 11, 2012, previously published on December 7, 2012New regulations enacted by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) applicable to tribal leases will have far reaching impacts on businesses, particularly renewable energy projects, utilizing tribal lands.
|The British Columbia Court of Appeal Upholds Decision That City Owes no Duty to Consult First Nation — Neskonlith Indian Band v. Salmon Arm (City)|
Aidan Cameron, Nicholas Hughes, Thomas Isaac; McCarthy Tétrault LLP;
September 27, 2012, previously published on September 25, 2012On September 24, 2012, in Neskonlith Indian Band v. Salmon Arm (City) (Neskonlith), the British Columbia Court of Appeal (BCCA) dismissed the appeal of the Neskonlith Indian Band (Band), confirming that the City of Salmon Arm (City) did not owe a constitutional duty to consult the Band in respect...
|Aboriginal Construction and Project Development|
Joshua A. Jantzi, Bernard J. Roth; Dentons Canada LLP;
August 22, 2012In Canada, most major resource projects undertaken to develop natural resources occur on public lands (also referred to as Crown lands) administered by federal, provincial or territorial governments, depending on their location. In respect of most, if not all, of these Crown lands, there is...
|British Columbia Court of Appeal Rejects Broad Claims to Aboriginal Title by First Nation Groups|
Everett L. Bunnell, John Cassell, Beth Younggren; Norton Rose Canada LLP;
July 24, 2012, previously published on July 2012A year and a half after the hearing of the appeal, a notable decision in aboriginal title and rights litigation was released on June 27, 2012 - the British Columbia Court of Appeal decision in William v British Columbia (William).
|The British Columbia Supreme Court Confirms That Municipalities Have No Duty to Consult and Accommodate Aboriginal Peoples|
Carolina Manganelli; Lavery de Billy L.L.P.;
July 17, 2012, previously published on July 2012On April 4, 2012, the British Columbia Supreme Court rendered its decision in the case Neskonlith Indian Band v. Salmon Arm (City) and therein confirmed that municipalities have no duty to consult and accommodate Aboriginal peoples.
|Supreme Court Decision Affects Fee-to-Trust Determinations for Tribal Clients|
Fernando Anzaldua, Theodore J. Griswold; Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP;
July 4, 2012, previously published on June 22, 2012On June 18, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Patchak (567 U.S. --- (2012); 2012 WL 2202936) opened the door for new challenges on Secretary of the Interior determinations to take land into Trust for the benefit of a Tribe. The case...