[British Columbia Court of Appeal 1992-05-29]
data provider: CONTENTdm
is part of: Delgamuukw Trial Transcripts
contributor: British Columbia. Court of Appeal
creator: British Columbia. Supreme Court
issued: 2013
created: 1992-05-29
aggregated CHO: https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/delgamuukw/items/1.0018352/source.json
format: application/pdf
note: 1202 Submissions by Mr. Gouge 1 Vancouver, B.C. 2 29 May 1992 3 4 (PROCEEDINGS RESUMED PURSUANT TO AN ADJOURNMENT) 5 6 THE REGISTRAR: Order in court. 7 TAGGART, J.A.: Mr. Gouge, just before you begin, one of the 8 subjects discussed in the pre-hearing conference this 9 morning was the question of the status of Alcan as an 10 intervenor and its prospective status as a party to 11 this appeal. The Court has had an opportunity to 12 discuss that subject. There will be no decision with 13 respect of the party status until after oral argument 14 has been completed on July 3. We will proceed to the 15 end of the oral argument on this appeal on the basis 16 that Alcan is an intervenor. If the matter needs to 17 be dealt with thereafter the 3rd of July, the parties 18 will be given adequate notice. 19 MR. GOUGE: Thank you, my lord. 20 My lords, yesterday I was presenting the 21 submission that a provincial statute might be 22 effective to extinguish aboriginal title after 23 Confederation if it was a statute whose pith and 24 substance or fundamental character was one of the 25 heads of legislative authority set out in Section 92, 26 and Mr. Justice Lambert put to me the proposition as I 27 understood his lordship that that might not be so if 28 the effect of the provincial statute was to extinguish 29 aboriginal title and if aboriginal title was in some 30 way bound up with Indianness in such a way as to be 31 fundamental to the rights of aboriginal people. 32 It is my respectfull submission that the 33 proposition put to me by Mr. Justice Lambert would be 34 in error with respect to the constitutional framework 35 of Canada prior to 1982. The reason for that is that, 36 if your lordship's proposition were accepted, it would 37 be to judge the constitutional validity of a 38 provincial statute solely by its effect and that, in 39 my respectful submission, was not the principle by 40 which provincial statutes were to be tested prior to 41 1982. The authority for that propos…
has type: Trial proceedings
spatial: British Columbia
identifier: KEB529.5.L3 B757
is shown at: 10.14288/1.0018352
language: English
subject: Uukw, Delgam, 1937-
subject: Indigenous peoples--Canada
subject: Oral history
subject: Wet'suwet'en First Nation
provider: Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
publisher: Vancouver : United Reporting Service Ltd.
rights: Images provided for research and reference use only. For permission to publish, copy, or otherwise distribute these images, please contact the Courts of British Columbia: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/
source: Original Format: University of British Columbia. Library. Law Library.
type: Text