R v Sparrow
1075 was an important decision of the Supreme Court of Canada concerning the application of Aboriginal rights under section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982.Sparrow admitted to all the facts in the charge but justified them on the ground that he was exercising his Aboriginal right to fish under section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982.It held that Sparrow was exercising an "inherent" Aboriginal right that existed before the provincial legislation and was guaranteed and protected by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.The word "existing" in section 35(1), the Court said, must be "interpreted flexibly so as to permit their evolution over time."The Court found that the Crown could not prove that the right to fish for food had been extinguished prior to 1982.