Provincial court ruling says indigenous groups can reclaim ownership of land taken from them scores of years agoProvincial court ruling says indigenous groups can reclaim ownership of land taken from them scores of years ago
The ruling has roiled the wealthy districts of the greater Vancouver area, one of the most expensive real-estate markets in the world. Its scope has shocked businesses, homeowners and community leaders, who fear that it nullifies the principle of “indefeasible title,” the legal term for absolute certainty of land ownership, setting a precedent that threatens billions in real-estate investment.
The Aug. 7 ruling threatens to chill a real-estate market that is increasingly globalThe Aug. 7 ruling threatens to chill a real-estate market that is increasingly global
Less than two weeks after the court’s ruling, unnamed buyers had backed out of their planned purchase of Richmond’s insolvent Versante Hotel. “Their stated concern was the recent Cowichan Tribes court ruling, which introduced uncertainty around land title ownership and potential precedent risk,” said the real-estate service firm Colliers in a letter to the insolvency adviser, Deloitte.
Separately, a Canadian developer, Montrose Properties, thought it had secured a tenant to build a warehouse on a 190,000-square-foot lot just south of Vancouver. Now the deal is unraveling because of the ruling.
The ruling creates a legal paradoxThe ruling creates a legal paradox
It is logically impossible for two different entities to have exclusive titles on the same plot. Young acknowledged this in her ruling, but left it to future litigation or negotiations to resolve.
Adding to the complexity, other indigenous groups oppose Cowichan’s claimAdding to the complexity, other indigenous groups oppose Cowichan’s claim
The Musqueam Indian Band and the Tsawwassen First Nation have appealed the decision and said Cowichan is asserting title to land and fishing rights that belong to them.
Seems like an absolute total clusterf*** and shame on the judge for creating a legal paradox and leaving it to "future litigation" to resolve.
See:
Cowichan Tribes and Private Property: Separating Fact from Fiction
https://jfklaw.ca/cowichan-tribes-and-private-property-separating-fact-from-fiction/
JFK Law argues that the tribe is not seeking to displace established private land owners, but rather seeking to redress British Columbia’s violation of their Federal Treaty obligations, which grants Aboriginal title over certain land, over which the provinces have no jurisdiction. "Aboriginal title" does not mean that no other legal ownership exists. It does mean that the legal structure in the chain of titles is different, but does not invalidate private land titles, aka "fee simple ownership".
So basically tribes in B.C. (at least) are suing the provincial government for having ignored Federal treaty rights for decades, and the remediation for that injustice has yet to be determined. The process could take another decade or two. In the end, it could mean that land titles are between private buyers and the Aboriginal Nation that holds the treaty rights over those lands, instead of with the Crown, or perhaps some combination of both.
What a preposterous ruling. In principle, of course a legitimate title heir could challenge the current owner's claim. That's what title insurance is for. That standard is very high, though, and for good reason.
I don't know if Canada has a supreme court to appeal to, but it's wild that the judge was like "Yeah, this ruling creates a legal paradox, but you guys can figure it out later."
I think they're more comfortable with laws existing in "tension" with each other. American law is more emphatic about declaring which principles supersede others when there's a conflict.
Retarted activist judges
Wow, this and the other Canadian related article today it really makes me doublecheck whether living in Canada is a good idea.
Probably will get appealed and struck down in a higher court but Canada has a lot of commies that love to posture and virtue signal.
Ultimately though this impacts BC most since like 95%+ of the province is non-treaty “unceded” land.
Most of Canada is covered by treaties where indigenous gave up their land claims like this
Have you seen this @grayruby
I saw the earlier post but not hardmoney’s reply. Agree I think it ultimately gets struck down but shows the insanity of the virtue signalling commies in Canada.
I can see a sudden spike in business for title searching and record archive sleuthing...
Leave it to the Canadians to come up with something this f'in retarded