This land is your land, this land is…wait, did anyone actually check the title? Canadian real estate got more bad news this month—the BC Supreme Court has ruled Cowichan Tribes still hold title to 1,846 acres of prime Richmond land in Greater Vancouver. The longest trial in Canadian history only targeted government-held lands, but may have a much wider impact, setting a precedent that could reshape property law.
Cowichan First Nations Claim Nearly 6% of Richmond, BC
The lawsuit was launched by First Nations groups to assert ownership over 1,846 acres on Lulu Island—including privately held and submerged lands—about 5.8% of Richmond, BC. They argue the exclusive occupation of the territory pre-dating British assertion of sovereignty, with no treaty, purchase, or surrender demonstrating transfer. The First Nations group explicitly targeted Crown or city-held lands, and the ruling notes they were not seeking the court to invalidate or annul private property titles.
The case is called the Cowichan Tribes v. Attorney General of Canada due to the federal government’s fiduciary responsibilities. The conditions make them responsible for the “Indians, and Lands reserved for the Indians.” The federal government’s constitutional role is to deal with treaty agreements, but there was none here.
The actual list of defendants was much longer, and includes two First Nations groups opposing the claim due to overlapping territorial assertions:
- Canada (attorney general)
- British Columbia (attorney general), also considered a Crown government
- The City of Richmond, where much of the land is located
- Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA)
- Musqueam Indian Band
- Tsawwassen First Nation
After a trial lasting 513 days over 5 years, the judge ruled in favor of the Cowichan First Nations. The Aboriginal title wasn’t extinguished, making Crown land grants invalid and the fee simple titles granted defective. The judge ordered an 18-month suspension of their ruling to conduct good-faith negotiations and an orderly resolution.
Whoops! No Treaty, No Sale—Unlike Most of Canada, 95% of BC Was Never Secured By Treaty
Canada’s controversial treaty system is one of the key issues at play, and not in the way most would assume. Canada is covered by a patchwork of historic and modern treaties that outline the terms of land acquisition and compensation. They generally state that Indigenous Nations cede land to the Crown “forever,” in exchange for compensation, reserves, annual payments, and vaguely stated limited rights.
There are a lot of reasons these treaties are arguably invalid—vague terms, land traded by those without title, and a lack of free and informed consent required by Canadian law, are the biggest ones that come up. However, this isn’t the issue in this situation—the Crown didn’t bother with a Treaty here.
Just 5% of BC is covered by historical treaties, with most of that land in the northeast. The remaining 95% of BC isn’t covered by any agreement, including nearly all of southern BC, Vancouver Island, and the Lower Mainland. For some reason the Federal government secured most of Canada under treaty, then just gave up on BC—a running theme if we’re being honest.
The lack of treaty agreement set the basis for the precedent-setting 2014 Tsilhqot’in Nation case. The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the Aboriginal title continues to exist where Indigenous groups can prove exclusive historic occupation of a land that hasn’t been extinguished by treaty or law.
This stands in sharp contrast to regions like Ontario, where the British Crown claimed ownership of Toronto with the Toronto Purchase in the late-1700s. It even revised the agreement in 1805, and when the 1805 agreement was considered too vague by Canada’s modern settlement claims process, reviewed and formally settled again in 2010. In 2010, Canada agreed to pay the Mississaugas $145 million to agree on formal boundaries. Not a bad deal—that’s less than 145 new condo apartments, right?
Canadian Land Ownership Can Dramatically Change With Ruling
The case’s 863-page ruling can drastically change the legal landscape of land ownership. This was the first time a Canadian court ruled that Crown grants on Aboriginal title are defective in law. Even though the court explicitly stated this doesn’t invalidate homeownership, it found the fee simple titles granted by the Crown in those areas are defective and invalid.
Today’s homeowners are safe, but the court confirmed Aboriginal title can exist over privately owned land—and that’s a door no one’s closed. Even if the court doesn’t order expropriation of private homes, it undermines private ownership. The finding also sets a precedent for large areas in 95% of BC without treaty agreements, and potentially impacts similar situations in other provinces. This creates legal uncertainty, which property markets don’t like—a clear title is important for loans secured against land (i.e., a mortgage).
The Cowichan First Nations’ goal was reclaiming government-held lands, not individual owners. The immediate fight is between the Crown and the First Nations. Still, by affirming that Aboriginal title can exist over privately owned land, the ruling leaves the door open for future claims affecting homeowners. Governments prefer to negotiate shared use or compensation rather than accept displacement, but the possibility remains. Especially if a party isn’t just seeking government-held lands, like the Cowichan did.
Governments Planning Appeal, Land Ownership Laws Unclear
The Government of BC has already announced its plans to appeal the ruling, on the basis it has implications for property rights and requires more clarity on land ownership.
“We disagree strongly with the decision. British Columbia will be filing an appeal and seeking a stay to pause implementation until the appeal is resolved,” wrote Niki Sharma, Attorney General of BC.
Strongly disagreeing isn’t enough for an appeal—the province has to find an error in judgment or the misapplication of law or legal principles. That means the appeal will focus on brand-new questions about the conflict of Aboriginal title and private property.
Finally, a reasonable take on this. The truth is halfway between the lunatics screaming “First Nations are going to take our homes” and “this means nothing.”
> The Cowichan don’t want your homes, they want influence over the lands they were already living on.
> Just because the Cowichan don’t want it, another group may want it. Much of Quebec isn’t covered by treaty IIRC, but ownership was assumed because it was “taken” from the French.
Try getting the Quebecois to do land acknowledgments or rename streets in another language. lmao.
DOES THIS MEAN, THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO PAYE BACK ALL THE MONEY THEY RECEIVED OVER THE LAST DECADES FROM THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT??
Wow, Canadians have no idea that our country has contracts and laws. Should we go back to dear Trudeau where the law is whatever he feels like that day, like ceasing bank accounts because it hurts his feelings?
1. the payments to indigenous people is a part of the treaty contracts the King made (they include perpetual payments for land use, as per the article which even notes Toronto was purchased outright to avoid perpetual payments). You don’t like that, take it up with the Crown. I think we should be a Republic and determine our own land use but the soft-@55 big government “traditional” right needs a King or they don’t know how to cope with their life.
2. this First Nations group isn’t one of the ones collecting perpetual use. They’ve continually occupied the land and argue the title is intact, proven using our own legal system. As per the article, two First Nations groups are defendants here.
Who’s going to buy a piece of land in BC until it’s cleared up? Everyone everywhere in government is literally acknowledging before they speak that they’re on unceded territory.
Isn’t this acknowledgment that the land was never properly obtained and aboriginal title should be recognized?
LMAO. “The King of England should have used a Realtor” was a reminder that you could probably charge for the newsletter and I’d still pay for the jokes.
Kudos to taking a serious topic making me laugh. I’m a real estate professional myself and have trouble unpacking what this means. I guess I should have paid less attention in real estate law contracts, or more attention to Canadian history. Good explainer.
Two points:
1. The Justice involved has overstepped. This country is now being run by unelected judges.
2 The FN don’t want the land back. They just want money, probably billions.
Elected judges sounds like a nightmare. Imagine Atlantic Canada and Ontario determining who controls all of Western Canada’s legal system? This is bonehead Dougasoraus logic.
They literally won using the legal title that system we designed to work against them. Who we should be blaming is decades of federal government that didn’t think it would be a good idea to lock down the untreated lands since a case like this happens once a decade.
The reality is the government wants these losses because it facilitates private industry leveraging first nations to get around politically-challenging decisions. i.e. the gov elected by oil barons don’t want a pipeline—it’s the first nations that do!
Also, if the government just decided one day it was going to take your land without even killing you first, are you going to let them do it? The First Nations are painted as peace loving leftists by the right, but many on the right look like government patsies when it comes to actually defending their rights in contrast to these First Nations. Good on them. For you, nut up, buttercup.
That is the correct answer. Always has been, always will be.
Laws for thee but not for me!
“This country is now being run by unelected judges” is what MAGA Republicans say every time a federal judge rules against one of DJT’s illegal or unconstitutional executive orders.
It will be interesting to see what happens with the appeal.
Elbows up! Knees down! Pockets out! It’s just the start!
Canadian real estate and jobs getting decimated.
Invest in the USA. Dump your Canadian businesses, farms, homes and condos. Buy new USA luxury homes for les than 400K. see youtube, zillow,redfin etc.
Just another anti white article. With anti white sentiments and an anti white judge. Funny that the comment moderator has to write “Dont be racist”. When the article is inherently racist against white people. 🙄
This world is absolutely screwed. Canada is the beginning of the end. Time to move to a state with open carry laws and freedom of speech. Texas looks real good these days. Crime rates are low, real estate is comparable and not being given to the freeloading Native Americans. Sounds like “True north strong and free” has become “True north weak and feeble”.
Hilarious. As a white male that’s tired of the whole DEI thing too, fragile whites like you make us seem just as bad, if not worse.
Steven simply explained the legal findings in plain english, and the only way you could comprehend it is by framing it as an attack on our race. This is as dumb as when he was early on reporting on crime and unemployment related to immigration and labeled anti-Indian, and called racist for highlighting BC’s money laundering problem that led to an inquiry.
Many years back
The natives evicted many ailing seniors in their 90’s of their homes in Penticton, Those who have every penny gone,
Do you think it will be any different no mater where the situation is with natives,
You can be guaranteed there will be some people that will be given a real stressful strain on their lives, When someone wants money to dig up the dead many years past, of whom they probably do not know or have not known,
You know there is only one thing they are after, money and they want to be considered as God,
People of this nature do not care about others except themselves,
When a land has been abandon to live some place else, You have given up your rights to live there, just because you left some trash there, it still does not mean you own the land,
Just watch the future as it will definitely show their teeth,
Wow Canada is so lame. Yes.. let’s give people’s land to random Natives who didn’t do anything to earn it. Who aren’t personally effected by previously not having owned it. Why? Cause we’re such altruistic people guys. And we need more open land fill rez.
Good. Give them their stolen lands back. If people want to live on private property on indigenous owned lands, the government should buy the mortgages from the banks and sell them to the indigenous bands. On rentals, so the same but go even further, give them the deeds and let them be the landlords. I have literally no problem with any of this.
The reason this happening is ignorance of the past and not a mystery at all.
Premier Douglas dealing with violent American prospectors during the BC Gold Rush to prevent annexation. The history of manifesting itself in the he present.
Then subsequent Premiers, Feds and more importantly, the general populace who never learned that only the North East part of the province(1899 treaty signed along with the previous Douglas Treaties on Vancouver Island) is on ceded territory or bothering to care.
A former Richmond city councillor warned about this decades ago and nobody did anything and the general populace also did not make it a concern.
https://www.richmond-news.com/local-news/one-battle-after-another-for-farmland-in-cowichan-title-ruling-ex-councillor-11076423
Sleeping dogs and all that. Or is it chickens coming home to roost?