Summary

Keywords

Charter of Rights — Right to equality — Judgments and orders — Reasons — Whether s. 89 of the Indian Act unjustifiably infringes the equality rights of non-status Indians and Métis — Whether s. 89 of the Indian Act unjustifiably infringes the equality rights of Indians holding property situated on a reserve —Whether the Court of Appeal provided sufficient reasons for holding that the respondent did not waive his rights under s. 89 of the Indian Act — Indian Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-5, s. 89.

Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

The applicant provided legal services to the respondent. The respondent has not paid his legal fees in full. The applicant maintains a solicitor’s lien over some of the respondent’s property that he seeks to enforce through the appointment of a receiver-manager. The respondent’s property includes, among other things, a business situated on a reserve.

The application judge first appointed a receiver-manager for all of the respondent’s property. The Court of Appeal remitted the matter to the application judge to consider whether s. 89 of the Indian Act prevents the appointment of a receiver-manager over the respondent’s on-reserve property.

The application judge held that s. 89 does not protect on-reserve property where that property originates, as it does in this case, from normal business transactions conducted in the commercial mainstream.

The Court of Appeal held that there is no exception to s. 89 for property originating from normal business transactions in the commercial mainstream. The respondent did not waive his rights under s. 89 as against the applicant. The Court of Appeal therefore allowed the appeal and held that the receivership and management order would not apply to the respondent’s on-reserve property.

Lower Court Rulings