R. v. Powley 2003 SCC 43, commonly called the Powley ruling, is a Supreme Court of Canada case defining Métis Aboriginal rights under section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982.
Contents
1Background
2Procedural history
3Aftermath
4See also
5References
Background
A Sault Ste. Marie father and son, Steve and Roddy Powley, were charged in 1993 with possession of a moose that they had shot out of season and without a licence. The pair pleaded not guilty on the grounds that as Métis, they had an Aboriginal right to hunt that was not subject to Ontario game laws.
Procedural history
The Ontario Court of Justice agreed and dismissed the charges. The Ontario Attorney General appealed that decision to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, which upheld the acquittals and denied the appeal.
The Ontario Attorney General appealed again, to the Ontario Court of Appeal, which also upheld the acquittals and denied the appeal. Finally, Ontario appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. A e a unanimous court upheld the decisions of the lower courts and defined a ten-step test for Métis rights, based on modified tests from the previous Indian Aboriginal rights decisions in R. v. Sparrow and R. v. Van der Peet.
Aftermath
Métis people seeking to exercise Aboriginal rights of hunting and fishing have to show that the practice in question relates to the practice of a rights-bearing Métis community prior to European political and legal control, and that they are members of the corresponding modern Métis community, not only by self-identification but by acceptance within the community.[1]
Thus, if a Métis group of people established a rights-bearing community, which was distinct from any Indian or Inuit Aboriginal groups they had descended from, then the practices that community exercised prior to European control may be Section 35(1) rights.
See also
The Canadian Crown and First Nations, Inuit and Métis
Note: "Aboriginal law" refers to Canadian law dealing with indigenous peoples, whereas "indigenous law" refers to the customary law of individual indigenous groups.
Sources of law
Aboriginal rights
Aboriginal title
Royal Proclamation of 1763
Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982
Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867
Treaty rights
Treaties and governmental relations
Covenant Chain (1670s)
Great Peace of Montreal (1701)
Nanfan Treaty (1701)
Halifax Treaties (1760-1761)
Treaties of Fort Niagara (1764-1784)
Upper Canada treaties
Penetanguishene Bay Purchase (1798)
Lake Simcoe–Lake Huron Purchase (1815)
Huron Tract Purchase (1827)
Saugeen Tract Agreement (1836)
Robinson Treaty (1850)
Douglas Treaties (1850-54)
Numbered Treaties (1871-1921)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Indian Act (1876-present)
1969 White Paper
James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975)
Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (1993)
Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (1995)
Nisga'a Final Agreement (1998)
Ongoing treaty negotiations in British Columbia
Paix des Braves (2002)
Duty to consult and accommodate (since 2004)
Case law
Attorney General of Canada v. Lavell
R. v. Badger
Calder v. British Columbia
Chippewas of Sarnia Band v. Canada
Corbiere v. Canada
Daniels v. Canada
Delgamuukw v. British Columbia
Native Women's Association of Canada v. Canada
Kruger and al. v. The Queen
R. v. Marshall; R. v. Bernard
R. v. Marshall
Mitchell v. M.N.R.
Paul v. British Columbia
Paulette Caveat
Powley ruling
R. v. Drybones
R. v. Gladstone
R. v. Gladue
Gladue report
R. v. Gonzales
R. v. Guerin
R. v. Jim
R. v. Pamajewon
R. v. Sparrow
Re Eskimos
St. Catharines Milling and Lumber Co. v. R.
R. v. Van der Peet
Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia
Daniels v. Canada
International rights and laws
Definitions and identity of indigenous peoples
Declaration of Indigenous Peoples Rights
United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
This article is part of a series on Information security Related security categories Internet security Cyberwarfare Computer security Mobile security Network security Threats Computer crime Vulnerability Eavesdropping Malware Spyware Ransomware Trojans Viruses Worms Rootkits Bootkits Keyloggers Screen scrapers Exploits Backdoors Logic bombs Payloads Denial of service Defenses Computer access control Application security Antivirus software Secure coding Secure by default Secure by design Secure operating systems Authentication Multi-factor authentication Authorization Data-centric security Encryption Firewall Intrusion detection system Mobile secure gateway Runtime application self-protection (RASP) v t e Information security , sometimes shortened to InfoSec , is the practice of preventing unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, inspection, recording or destruction of information. Th...
The Volkswagen Group MQB platform is the company's strategy for shared modular design construction of its transverse, front-engine, front-wheel-drive layout (optional front-engine, four-wheel-drive layout) automobiles. Volkswagen spent roughly $60bn [1] developing this new platform and the cars employing it. The platform underpins a wide range of cars from the supermini class to the mid size SUV class. MQB allows Volkswagen to assemble any of its cars based on this platform across all of its MQB ready factories. This allows the Volkswagen group flexibility to shift production as needed between its different factories. Beginning in 2012, Volkswagen Group marketed the strategy under the code name MQB , which stands for Modularer Querbaukasten , translating from German to "Modular Transversal Toolkit" or "Modular Transverse Matrix". [2] [3] MQB is one strategy within VW's overall MB (Modularer Baukasten or modular matrix) program which also includes th...
Comments
Post a Comment