R v. Arthur Aleck et al., 2000 BCPC 177

In Aboriginal Rights/Defences, Fish Cases on (Updated )

This case involved charges against 17 members of the Cheam Indian Band for fishing within their traditional territory on the Fraser River during a time that the fishery had been closed by D.F.O. Since the Crown admitted a prima facie case of infringement, this decision focused primarily on whether or not that infringement could be justified. In upholding the infringement …

Full Summary

R v. Q.M.P. Fisheries Ltd. et al, 2001 BCPC 210

In Aboriginal Rights/Defences, Fish Cases, Offences, Search and Seizure on (Updated )

This case involved charges of buying and selling salmon caught under the authority of a food fishing licence. This judgment was a ruling on a voice dire concerning the admissibility of documents seized under the authority of two search warrants issued under s. 487 of the Criminal Code. The court reviewed the affidavits filed in support of the affidavits and …

Full Summary

R v. Simon, [2002] N.B.J. No. 248

In Aboriginal Rights/Defences, Fish Cases on (Updated )

This case is the first post Marshall decision (digested herein) involving aboriginal fishing for lobster by members of the Burnt Church First Nation in Miramichi Bay. After the release of the Marshall decision, the accused was charged with illegal fishing for lobster in Miramichi Bay. After a trial upon an agreed state of facts, the court ruled as follows: 1) …

Full Summary

R v. Haines et al., Prov. Ct. File No. 22340/22576C

In Aboriginal Rights/Defences, Fish Cases on (Updated )

This case involved charges against of what is commonly called dual fishing. That is, fishing at the same time under the authority of both a commercial halibut licence and an aboriginal food fishing licence. Up until 1999, commercial by-catch of fish in excess of that allowed, could be relinquished to the Crown without penalty. At the same time, commercial aboriginal …

Full Summary

R v. Houle, 2003 ABPC 107

In Aboriginal Rights/Defences, Fish Cases on (Updated )

This case involved five aboriginal defendants charged with catching and retaining northern pike of a prohibited length while involved in a sport fishing derby. Amongst other things, a defence was raised based upon a right to fish pursuant to Treaty No. 6 of 1876. Upon review the evidence, the court rejected this defence because the defendants fishing activities were not …

Full Summary