R. v. Powley

R. v. Powley

The Court held that the Sault Ste. Marie Métis community is a historic and contemporary rights-bearing community and that its members have a constitutionally protected s.35(1) aboriginal right to hunt for food in the environs of Sault Ste. Marie; the Van der Peet framework applies but the pre-contact inquiry is modified to a post-contact pre-control temporal test for Métis claims; Ontario's Game and Fish Act ss.46 and 47(1) as applied to the respondents infringe that right and the Crown did not justify the infringement on the evidence, so the respondents' acquittals must be upheld.

Citation
2003 SCC 43
Parties
Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal: Her Majesty The Queen; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: Steve Powley; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: Roddy Charles Powley; Intervener: Attorney General of Canada; Intervener: Attorney General of Quebec; Intervener: Attorney General of New Brunswick; Intervener: Attorney General of Manitoba; Intervener: Attorney General of British Columbia; Intervener: Attorney General for Saskatchewan; Intervener: Attorney General of Alberta; Intervener: Attorney General of Newfoundland and Labrador; Intervener: Labrador Métis Nation; Intervener: Congress of Aboriginal Peoples; Intervener: Métis National Council (MNC); Intervener: Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO); Intervener: B.C. Fisheries Survival Coalition; Intervener: Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto Inc. (ALST); Intervener: Ontario Métis and Aboriginal Association (OMAA); Intervener: Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH); Intervener: Métis Chief Roy E. J. DeLaRonde, on behalf of the Red Sky Métis Independent Nation; Intervener: North Slave Métis Alliance
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 September 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal With Constitutional Question (s.35 Aboriginal Rights) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal Rendered
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; respondents' acquittals upheld; ss.46 and 47(1) of the Game and Fish Act of no force or effect in the circumstances as they apply to the respondents' asserted s.35 right
Legal Topics
Métis Rights, Hunting for Food, Section 35 Constitution Act 1982, Van Der Peet Test Modification, Justification and Conservation (sparrow), Membership Criteria
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Aboriginal Law Criminal Law Resource Law Métis Rights Hunting for Food Section 35 Constitution Act 1982 Van Der Peet Test Modification +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal

Steve Powley

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Roddy Charles Powley

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Attorney General of Canada

Intervener

Attorney General of Quebec

Intervener

Attorney General of New Brunswick

Intervener

Attorney General of Manitoba

Intervener

Attorney General of British Columbia

Intervener

Attorney General for Saskatchewan

Intervener

Attorney General of Alberta

Intervener

Attorney General of Newfoundland and Labrador

Intervener

Labrador Métis Nation

Intervener

Congress of Aboriginal Peoples

Intervener

Métis National Council (MNC)

Intervener

Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO)

Intervener

B.C. Fisheries Survival Coalition

Intervener

Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto Inc. (ALST)

Intervener

Ontario Métis and Aboriginal Association (OMAA)

Intervener

Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH)

Intervener

Métis Chief Roy E. J. DeLaRonde, on behalf of the Red Sky Métis Independent Nation

Intervener

North Slave Métis Alliance

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal With Constitutional Question (s.35 Aboriginal Rights) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada; Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal Rendered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether members of the Sault Ste. Marie Métis community possess an aboriginal right under s.35(1) to hunt for food in their traditional territory
  2. 2 Whether Ontario's Game and Fish Act ss.46 and 47(1) infringe that right
  3. 3 If infringement found, whether it is justified (conservation, difficulty of identification)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the Sault Ste. Marie Métis community is a historic and contemporary rights-bearing community and that its members have a constitutionally protected s.35(1) aboriginal right to hunt for food in the environs of Sault Ste. Marie; the Van der Peet framework applies but the pre-contact inquiry is modified to a post-contact pre-control temporal test for Métis claims; Ontario's Game and Fish Act ss.46 and 47(1) as applied to the respondents infringe that right and the Crown did not justify the infringement on the evidence, so the respondents' acquittals must be upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; respondents' acquittals upheld; ss.46 and 47(1) of the Game and Fish Act of no force or effect in the circumstances as they apply to the respondents' asserted s.35 right

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondents
  • Cross-appeal dismissed