CPAC is proudly owned by these leading companies
  • Rogers Logo
  • Shaw
  • Videotron Logo
  • Cogeco Logo
  • Eastlink Logo
  • Access Logo

Sally Behn, et al. v. Moulton Contracting Ltd., et al.

   
       Loading CPAC video...    
         
   
   

| video language:    

   
   
Supreme Court Hearings

Sally Behn, et al. v. Moulton Contracting Ltd., et al. (December 11, 2012)
Case # 34404

This appeal concerns the issue of Aboriginal law Treaty rights.
The Crown granted the respondent two timber sale licences and one road permit to log certain areas of land located within the Behn Family Territory.
That territory is located within the Treaty 8 territory of the Fort Nelson First Nation.
The appellants are members of the Behn family and are, with one exception, members of the Fort Nelson First Nation.
After Moulton’s access to the area was impeded by at least some of the appellants, Moulton filed a claim for damages.
The claim for damages was filed against members of the Behn family, the First Nation and their Chief, and the Crown.
In their statement of defence, the appellants denied that their acts were unlawful.
The appellants stated that the licenses and permit were issued unlawfully and gave no rights to harvest the timber or access the area.
The appellants alleged that the Crown both failed to consult adequately with the Fort Nelson First Nation.
By so doing the appellants claim the Crown interfered with the ability of the Fort Nelson First Nation to exercise its Treaty 8 rights meaningfully

Add new comment

Tête à Tête promotion image
The CPAC Digital Archive

Daily Programming Highlights


 

Latest Comments

Mak:
All this case and the police actions in this case prove is that the combined Canadian police forces are nothing more than and have no more a
oto:
The Supreme Court of Canada made the correct moral decision, regardless of case law. IBM Canada is paying Dick Waterman approximately $80K
Fredrick Owen Blacklaws:
Was the hearing simply a formality? Had the court made an, irrvocable, decision on the matter prior to the hearing?
Don Dash:
The main issue is that the threatening remarks were made in a place where it is assumed that confidentiality exist? Wasn't he in jail?