Chippewas of Sarnia Band v Canada (AG)

It had been sold by the band to Malcolm Cameron, a Canadian politician and land speculator, such transaction being ratified through letters patent issued in 1853."[11] Proceeding "on the basis that the Chippewas have a right of action against the Crown for damages",[12] the Court summarized the public and private law remedies with respect to the lands in question: An application for leave to appeal was denied in November 2001.[20] Chippewas of Sarnia, together with Delgamuukw, are considered to form the legal framework for determining aboriginal title in those parts of Canada with unceded territory that has never been formally surrendered to the Crown (most prominently in British Columbia).[4] Its approach with respect to dealing with the rights of private landowners involved was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court in R v Marshall.[f] Observers agreed that this case represented the first application of equity to land claims, but noted that the results were mixed.
Ontario Court of AppealLeave to appealSupreme Court of CanadaIndigenous peoplesin CanadaFirst NationsMétisTimelinePre-colonizationGeneticsSettler colonialismGenocideResidential schoolsIndian hospitalsReconciliationIndigenous lawBritish Columbia Treaty ProcessCrown and Indigenous peoplesHealth PolicyIdle No MoreIndian ActIndigenous and Northern Affairs CanadaLand BackLand claimsLand defenderLand titleMissing and Murdered Indigenous WomenNumbered TreatiesRoyal CommissionSelf-governmentSpecific claimsTreaty rightsIndigenous personalitiesCountry foodIndian reservesTerritoriesPacific CoastInuit languagesChinuk WawaIndigenous English DialectsAboriginal syllabicsChinuk pipaInuit grammarTraditional beliefsInuit religionIndex of articlesCourt of Appeal for Ontarioaboriginal titleCanadaFirst NationSt. Clair RiverSarniaOntarioMalcolm Cameronletters patentdeclarationclass proceedingOntario Superior Court of Justiceab initioper curiamsui generisnemo datequitable doctrinelachesBritish ColumbiaR v MarshallCanadian Bar ReviewAamjiwnaang First NationHuron TractGuerin v The QueenDelgamuukw v British ColumbiaOttawa Law ReviewR v Marshall (No 1)R v Marshall (No 2)McCarthy TétraultCanadian Aboriginalcustomary lawAboriginal land title in CanadaRoyal Proclamation of 1763Section 25 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and FreedomsSection 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ActConfederationCovenant ChainGreat Peace of MontrealNanfan TreatyPeace and Friendship TreatiesDouglas TreatiesGradual Civilization ActToronto PurchasePenetanguishene Bay PurchaseLake Simcoe–Lake Huron PurchaseTreaty 45Saugeen Tract AgreementRobinson TreatiesGradual Enfranchisement ActWhite PaperJames Bay and Northern Quebec AgreementNunavut Land Claims AgreementNisga'a Final AgreementPaix des BravesDuty to consult and accommodateJordan's PrincipleOngoing treaty negotiations in British ColumbiaAttorney General of Canada v LavellR v BadgerCalder v British ColumbiaCorbiere v CanadaDaniels v CanadaNative Women's Assn of Canada v CanadaKruger v RR v Marshall; R v BernardMitchell v MNRPaul v British ColumbiaPaulette CaveatPowley rulingR v DrybonesR v GladstoneR v GladueGladue reportR v GonzalesR v GuerinR v JimR v PamajewonR v SparrowRe EskimosSt Catharines Milling and Lumber Co v RR v Van der PeetTsilhqot'in Nation v British ColumbiaRestoule v CanadaIndigenous customary lawGrand CouncilMiꞌkmaqGreat Law of PeaceHaudenosauneePittailiniitWahkohtowinPlains CreeIndex of articles related to Indigenous Canadians