As a law firm that works with individuals and organizations from various backgrounds and cultures, often with reduced political agency, Ratcliff champions equality, diversity, and inclusion. Each day, we are fortunate to represent First Nations with female leadership, businesses with female founders, and families with women at their heart.
The BC Supreme Court ruled that Rio Tinto Alcan is interfering with Aboriginal fishing rights and causing harm to fish in the Nechako watershed. A team of Ratcliff lawyers worked in collaboration with the Sai’kuz and Stellat’en First Nations to advance the claim and achieve this significant step forward in Aboriginal Law in Canada.
An overview of legal matters to be considered in connection with a for-market development of First Nation reserve lands. For-market development of reserve lands involves many complex legal matters, the number and complexity of which may vary significantly between developments, depending on a wide range of variables.
More and more Indigenous governments are investing, and are directly involved, in for profit business ventures. Brent Lehmann outlines considerations for First Nation governments for participating in mainstream economic development.
Once a treaty has been negotiated, there are numerous activities that must be completed in order to “close” and then “implement” the treaty. Brent Lehmann provides insights on activities required of a first nation relating to the closing and implementation of their treaty.
An overview of the most common land management regimes that govern development and environmental management on Aboriginal lands in B.C.
Band councils owe fiduciary duties to their bands and to band members. These are distinct duties and while they are generally compatible they can, in some circumstances, conflict. Although the relationship between these duties has not received much attention from courts or academics, it is of great practical importance for band councils.
Given the cultural and economic importance of commercial fishing to BC First Nations, and in particular coastal First Nations, the answer to this question is obviously “yes”. However, this answer must be qualified somewhat: “Yes, provided the inclusion of commercial fisheries in the treaty meets the cultural and economic needs of the respective First Nation”.
The jurisprudential life of the Crown’s duty to consult with aboriginal people in the interim of the final determination of aboriginal claims is almost a decade long. Since the Supreme Court of Canada’s confirmation of the duty in 2004, First Nations have spent a lot of litigation time and effort trying to determine just how, when, and where they can enforce this duty.
The duty to consult articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Haida Nation v. British Columbia in 2004 continues to play an important and prevalent role in the process of Crown-First Nations reconciliation. This paper discusses the state of the law of consultation in 2013.
On November 3, 2009, the B.C. Supreme Court released its judgment in Ahousaht Nation v. Canada. Madam Justice Garson (now J.A.) concluded that all five Nuu-chah-nulth plaintiffs have aboriginal rights to fish in their traditional territories and sell that fish into the commercial marketplace.
Overview of Squamish Nation’s environmental assessment process, which was designed to parallel Crown environmental assessment processes and ensure project impacts on the Nation’s rights and title interests are understood and properly avoided or mitigated.
Our lawyers offer a broad range of experience and expertise, with a client-first philosophy to help with whatever you need.
Our lawyers offer a broad range of experience and expertise, with a client-first philosophy to help you achieve your goals.
