Jack et al. v. The Queen

Jack et al. v. The Queen

Appellants were entitled to invoke art.13; art.13 embodies a pre-Confederation policy that gives Indian food fishing a priority but does not create absolute, unqualified fishing rights; valid conservation measures enacted under the Fisheries Act, when shown to be reasonable and necessary, lawfully subordinate any...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1980] 1 SCR 294
Parties
Appellants: Joseph Daniel Jack; Harold Lewis Joe; Calvin Patrick Antoine; John Jimmy; Bernard Joe; Gordon Leon Goldsmith; Samuel Johnny Jimmy; Wilburt Joseph Canute; Respondent: Her Majesty The Queen
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 July 1979
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Terms of Union Art.13, Conservation, Fishing Rights, Federal Legislative Jurisdiction, Judicial Review
Source Language
english
Aboriginal Law Constitutional Law Fisheries Law Administrative Law Terms of Union Art.13 Conservation Fishing Rights Federal Legislative Jurisdiction +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Daniel Jack; Harold Lewis Joe; Calvin Patrick Antoine; John Jimmy; Bernard Joe; Gordon Leon Goldsmith; Samuel Johnny Jimmy; Wilburt Joseph Canute

Appellants

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether art.13 of the Terms of Union affords protection to Indian fishing and limits federal fisheries legislation
  2. 2 Whether the appellants had standing/status to invoke art.13
  3. 3 Whether the Fisheries Act and regulations could validly prohibit food fishing by Indians

Ratio Decidendi

Appellants were entitled to invoke art.13; art.13 embodies a pre-Confederation policy that gives Indian food fishing a priority but does not create absolute, unqualified fishing rights; valid conservation measures enacted under the Fisheries Act, when shown to be reasonable and necessary, lawfully subordinate any protection under art.13; on the facts the closure was justified and convictions must be upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions of the appellants affirmed