DOCSLIB.ORG

File No. 33880 (ON APPEAL from the MANITOBA COURT of APPEAL) BETWEEN: Manitoba Metis Federation Inc., Yvon Dumont, Billy Jo De L

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
File No. 33880 (ON APPEAL from the MANITOBA COURT of APPEAL) BETWEEN: Manitoba Metis Federation Inc., Yvon Dumont, Billy Jo De L File No. 33880 IN SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE MANITOBA COURT OF APPEAL) BETWEEN: Manitoba Metis Federation Inc., Yvon Dumont, Billy Jo De La Ronde, Roy Chartrand, Ron Erickson, Claire Riddle, Jack Fleming, Jack McPherson, Don Roulette, Edgar Bruce Jr., Freda Lundmark, Miles Allarie, Celia Klassen, Alma Belhumeur, Stan Guiboche, Jeanne Perrault, Marie Banks Ducharme and Earl Henderson Appellants and Attorney General of Canada and Attorney General of Manitoba Respondents APPELLANTS' FACTUM ROSENBLOOM, ALDRIDGE, BARTLEY & BURKE-ROBERTSON ROSLING Barristers & Solicitors Barristers & Solicitors 70 Gloucester Street 440 - 355 Burrard Street Ottawa ON K2P OA2 Vancouver B.C. V6C 2G8 THOMAS R. BERGER, Q.c. ROBERT E. HOUSTON, Q.C. JAMES ALDRIDGE, Q.c. Tel: 613-236-9665 HARLEY SCHACHTER Fax: 613-235-4430 Tel: 604-684-1311 Fax: 604-684-6402 Counsel for the Applicants Ottawa Agent for the Applicants Myles J. Kirvan Myles J. Kirvan DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA CANADA Department of Justice Department of Justice Prairie Region 234 Wellington Street 301-310 Broadway Avenue Room 216 Winnipeg MB R3C OS6 Ottawa ON KIA OH8 MARK KINDRACHUK CHRISTOPHER RUP AR Tel: 306-975-4765 Tel: 613-941-2351 Fax: 306-975-5013 Fax: 613-954-1920 [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for the Respondent, Counsel for the Respondent, The Attorney General of Canada The Attorney General of Canada ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MANITOBA GOWLING LAFLEUR HENDERSON Department of Justice Barristers & Solicitors Constitutional Law Branch Suite 2600, 160 Elgin Street 1205 - 405 Broadway Ottawa, ON KIP 1C3 Winnipeg MB R3C 3L6 HEATHER LEONOFF, Q.c. HENRY S. BROWN, Q.C. MICHAEL CONNER Tel: 613-233-1781 Tel: 204-945-0679 Fax: 613-563-9869 Fax: 204-945-0053 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for the Respondent Ottawa Agent for the Respondent The Attorney General of Manitoba The Attorney General of Manitoba TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I - STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................................... 1 PART II - ISSUES ....................................................................................................................... 15 PART III - ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................ 16 A. Standing ............................................................................................................................. 16 B. Mootness ............................................................................................................................ 17 C. Minorities Under the Canadian Constitution ..................................................................... 19 D. Section 31: Fiduciary Duty ................................................................................................ 23 1. Section 31: Fiduciary Duty Embedded in the Constitution ................................... 25 ii. Purpose of the Children's Grant: Content of Fiduciary Duty ............................... .32 a) McInnes J and Scott C.J.M ........................................................................ 32 b) Macdonald's and Cartier's Speeches on the Purpose of the Children's Grant ............................................................................. .32 c) Scott C.J.M.'s Ruling Regarding the Speeches as to the Purpose of Section 31 ........... :.................................................................... 33 d) The Content of the Duty ........................................................................... .34 E. Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Random Selection .................................................................. .3 5 F. Breach of Fiduciary Duty: The Great Delay ..................................................................... .41 G. Canada's Defence: Canada's Evidence ............................................................................. 56 H. The Court of Appeal's Errors Regarding Breach .............................................................. 58 i. Ruling on Bench without Finding that a Duty Existed .......................................... 58 ii. Requiring "Deliberate Ineptitude" ......................................................................... 59 iii. Relying on the Crown's Unique Role as a Fiduciary ........................................... 60 L Manitoba: Constitutionality and Operability of Provincial Legislation ............................ 61 i. Section 91(1) of the Constitution Act, 1867........................................................... 62 ii. Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867......................................................... 63 iii. Paramountcy .......................................................................................................... 65 J. Section 32 ........................................................................................................................... 67 K. Limitations ......................................................................................................................... 76 1. Laches ................................................................................................................................ 7 8 M. Declaratory Relief.............................................................................................................. 78 PART IV - SUBMISSIONS IN SUPPORT OF COSTS ........................................................... 79 PART V - ORDER(S) SOUGHT ................................................................................................ 79 PART VI - TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................................. 81 PART VII - LEGISLATION ...................................................................................................... 83 I PART I - STATEMENT OF FACTS I. This case concerns the rights ofthe Metis people of Manitoba which were provided for in sections 31 and 32 of the Manitoba Act, 1870 and subsequently given constitutional protection by virtue of the Constitution Act, 1871. The Appellants seek declarations that these rights were frustrated or defeated by virtue of breaches of fiduciary duty and unconstitutional actions and enactments by the federal Crown, as well as by unconstitutional or inoperative enactments of the provincial Legislature. 2. The Appellants rely on the facts of history, which are generally not in dispute. The Appellants rely on the facts as found by the trial judge and the Court of Appeal, except where indicated. The narrative of events is not in dispute. The documents themselves are not in dispute. The trial judge concluded, with respect to the documentary record, at Trial Reasons, Record Vol. I-III, paragraph 458, that: ... while there are nonetheless gaps in the documentary record, generally speaking, that which the Plaintiffs assert as regard the documentary record is correct. 3. The heart of this appeal engages the proper interpretation and characterization of the Manitoba Act, 1870, as well as the proper interpretation and characterization of federal and provincial statutory provisions relating to the Manitoba Act. As these are questions of law, the standard of review is therefore one of "correctness". 4. In R v. Blais [2003] 2 S.C.R. 236 (SCC), para. 33, this Court described the Metis as Canada's "negotiating partners in the entry of Manitoba into Confederation". Professor Gerhard Ens, an expert witness for the Crown, wrote in Homeland to Hinterland, 1996, that "the creation of a 'new nation' of mixed-blood people on the western prairies remains one of the most striking aspects of Canadian history". He also wrote that: For much of the nineteenth century, the Red River Settlement was considered a Metis homeland because living there allowed them to occupy this niche with assurance. Once the Red River Settlement ceased to provide important opportunities such as hunting, freighting, trading and provisioning, the colony ceased to be a Metis homeland. In this sense, one might view Riel's efforts during 1869-70 as an attempt to reconstruct a Metis identity in political or constitutional terms as its social and economic bases were eroding. [Emphasis added.] 2 5. Scott C.J.M., writing for the Manitoba Court of Appeal, summarized the historical background of the case in the Court's Reasons for Decision, (henceforth "Reasons, Record Vol. III-IV") paras. 14 - 168. He referred to the Royal Charter granted by the Crown to the Hudson's Bay Company of 1670, the Selkirk grant, the rivalry between the Hudson's Bay Company and the Northwest Company, and the development of the Red River Settlement. He wrote, at Reasons, Record Vol. III-IV, paras. 21 and 24 to 27: 21. In 1817, Lord Selkirk entered into a treaty with a number ofIndian bands which granted and confirmed "unto our Sovereign Lord the King" land for two .miles on either side of the Red River, all the way from Lake Winnipeg to the north to what is now Grand Forks, North Dakota, in the south, and similarly on the Assiniboine River to a point west of what is now Portage la Prairie. This two-mile strip became known as the settlement belt. Subsequently, the Selkirk Treaty, as it came to be known, was considered to constitute an extinguishment of "Indian title" to the lands in question, a concept about which we will read much more. 24. As the Red River Settlement grew and prospered along the Red and Assiniboine Rivers, the community became organized
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Note Abstract
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 382 427 RC 020 085 RUTH(:.: Candline, Mary TITLE Stages of Learning: Building a Native Curriculum. Teachers' Guide, Student Activities--Part I, Research Unit--Part II. INSTITUTION Manitoba Dept. of Education and Training, Winnipeg. Literacy Office. PUB DATE [92] NOTE I38p. PUB TYPE Guides - Classroom Use - Instructional Materials (For Learner) (051) -- Guides - Classroom Use Teaching Guides (For Teacher) (052) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC06 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *American Indian Education; Biographies; *Canada Natives; Canadian Studies; *Civics; Curriculum; Elementary Secondary Education; Federal Indian Relationship; Foreign Countries; Instructional Materials; Interviews; Language Arts; Learning Activities; *Library Skills; Politics; Public Officials; Reading Materials; Research Papers (Students); *Research Skills; Research Tools; Sculpture; Student Research; Teaching Guides; Vocabulary Development; Writing Assignments IDENTIFIERS Crazy Horse; *Manitoba ABSTRACT This language arts curriculum developed for Native American students in Manitoba (Canada) consists of a teachers' guide, a student guide, and a research unit. The curriculum includes reading selections and learning activities appropriate for the different reading levels of both upper elementary and secondary students. The purpose of the unit is for students to develop skills in brainstorming, biography writing, letter writing, note taking, researching, interviewing, spelling, and vocabulary. Reading selections focus on Elijah Harper, an Ojibway Cree Indian who helped defeat the Meech Lake Accord, an amendment to Canada's Constitution proposed in 1987. The Meech Lake Accord would have transferred power from the federal government to provincial governments and would have failed to take into account the interests of Natives, women, and minorities. The curriculum also includes reading selections on the creation of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry and on Crazy Horse.
    [Show full text]
  • Cluster 2: a Profound Ambivalence: First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Relations with Government
    A Profound Ambivalence: First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Relations with Government by Ted Longbottom C urrent t opiCs in F irst n ations , M étis , and i nuit s tudies Cluster 2: a profound ambivalence: First nations, Métis, and inuit relations with Government Setting the Stage: Economics and Politics by Ted Longbottom L earninG e xperienCe 2.1: s ettinG the s taGe : e ConoMiCs and p oLitiCs enduring understandings q First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples share a traditional worldview of harmony and balance with nature, one another, and oneself. q First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples represent a diversity of cultures, each expressed in a unique way. q Understanding and respect for First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples begin with knowledge of their pasts. q Current issues are really unresolved historical issues. q First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples want to be recognized for their contributions to Canadian society and to share in its successes. essential Questions Big Question How would you describe the relationship that existed among Indigenous nations and between Indigenous nations and the European newcomers in the era of the fur trade and the pre-Confederation treaties? Focus Questions 1. How did Indigenous nations interact? 2. How did First Nations’ understandings of treaties differ from that of the Europeans? 3. What were the principles and protocols that characterized trade between Indigenous nations and the traders of the Hudson’s Bay Company? 4. What role did Indigenous nations play in conflicts between Europeans on Turtle Island? Cluster 2: a profound ambivalence 2­7 Background Before the arrival of the Europeans, First Peoples were self-determining nations.
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 Guide: In-Person Hearings at the Federal Court
    COVID-19 Guide: In-person Hearings at the Federal Court OVERVIEW This guide seeks to outline certain administrative measures that are being taken by the Court to ensure the safety of all individuals who participate in an in-person-hearing. It is specifically directed to the physical use of courtrooms. For all measures that are to be taken outside of the courtroom, but within common areas of a Court facility, please refer to the guide prepared by the Courts Administrative Service, entitled Resuming In-Person Court Operations. You are also invited to view the Court’s guides for virtual hearings. Additional restrictions may apply depending on the evolving guidance of the local or provincial public health authorities, and in situations where the Court hearing is conducted in a provincial or territorial facility. I. CONTEXT Notwithstanding the reopening of the Court for in-person hearings, the Court will continue to schedule all applications for judicial review as well as all general sittings to be heard by video conference (via Zoom), or exceptionally by teleconference. Subject to evolving developments, parties to these and other types of proceedings are free to request an in-person hearing1. In some instances, a “hybrid” hearing, where the judge and one or more counsel or parties are in the hearing room, while other counsel, parties and/or witnesses participate via Zoom, may be considered. The measures described herein constitute guiding principles that can be modified by the presiding Judge or Prothonotary. Any requests to modify these measures should be made as soon as possible prior to the hearing, and can be made by contacting the Registry.
    [Show full text]
  • Court Administration Systems
    COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS of key characteristics of COURT ADMINISTRATION SYSTEMS Presented to the Canadian Judicial Council Administration of Justice Committee Administrative Efficiency in Trial and Appeal Courts Sub-Committee By Karim Benyekhlef Cléa Iavarone-Turcotte Nicolas Vermeys Université de Montréal Centre de recherche en droit public July 6th, 2011 © Canadian Judicial Council Catalogue Number JU14-24/2013E-PDF ISBN 978-1-100-21994-3 Available from: Canadian Judicial Council Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0W8 (613) 288-1566 (613) 288-1575 (facsimile) and at: www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca FOREWORD | iii Foreword In 2006, the Canadian Judicial Council published a report entitled Alternative Models of Court Administration. In exploring the trend towards governments granting greater administrative autonomy to the courts, the report offered seven different models present in a number of jurisdictions. In 2011 the Administration of Justice Committee of Council commissioned a research study which would present a comparison of key characteristics of court administrative systems against those models in common law countries including Australia, England and Wales, New Zealand, North Ireland, the Republic of Ireland and Scotland. Key to this comparative analysis was the collection of legislation, memoranda of understanding and other forms of written agreements between the Judiciary and the Executive. They outline which level of government is responsible for certain or all aspects of court administration. The report consists of two documents. Presented here is the first part, namely, a comparative analysis building on the seven models presented in the 2006 report and further analysing how each of the selected jurisdictions advances their work according to six specific characteristics of court administration.
    [Show full text]
  • 71 History of Factums Je Côté* I
    HISTORY OF FACTUMS 71 HISTORY OF FACTUMS J.E. CÔTÉ* The history of the factum in Canada is little known Bien que l’histoire du mémoire au Canada soit peu but greatly significant in the development of written connue, elle a contribué de façon importante à argument. Written argument grew alongside the oral l’avènement de l’argumentation écrite, qui évolué en legal tradition. The factum developed in Canada in an parallèle avec la tradition de l’exposé oral. Le unorthodox way. Unlike most Canadian laws and mémoire s’est implanté au Canada selon une voie peu procedures, which find their roots in common law orthodoxe. Contrairement à la plupart des lois et England, the factum originated in Quebec’s civil procédures canadiennes qui prennent leur fondement jurisdiction before being adopted in the Northwest dans la common law de l’Angleterre, le mémoire a pris Territories. This article explores the evolution of son origine dans le système de droit civil du Québec written argument and the historical use of the factum avant d’être adopté dans les Territoires du Nord- in the United Kingdom and Canada and details the Ouest. Outre un survol de l’évolution de practice of factum use in Alberta particularly. l’argumentation écrite et de la façon dont on a eu recours au mémoire au Royaume-Uni et au Canada par le passé, l’article expose en détail l’utilisation du mémoire en Alberta. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 71 II. EVOLUTION ................................................ 72 A. THE UNITED KINGDOM ................................... 72 B. QUEBEC ............................................... 74 C. THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA .........................
    [Show full text]
  • Precedent Unbound? Contemporary Approaches to Precedent in Canada
    The Peter A. Allard School of Law Allard Research Commons Faculty Publications Allard Faculty Publications 2007 Precedent Unbound? Contemporary Approaches to Precedent in Canada Debra Parkes Allard School of Law at the University of British Columbia, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.allard.ubc.ca/fac_pubs Part of the Courts Commons Citation Details Debra Parkes, "Precedent Unbound? Contemporary Approaches to Precedent in Canada" ([forthcoming in 2007]) 32:1 Man LJ 135. This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Allard Faculty Publications at Allard Research Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Allard Research Commons. Page 1 TITLE: Precedent Unbound? Contemporary Approaches to Precedent in Canada AUTHOR: Debra Parkes SOURCE: Manitoba Law Journal CITED: (2007) 32 Man. L.J. 135 - 162 1 Stare decisis is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase stare decisis et non quieta movere, and may be translated as "to stand by decisions and not to disturb settled matters."1 In Gulliver's Travels, the English satirist Johnathan Swift had Gulliver say: It is a maxim among these lawyers, that whatever hath been done before, may le- gally be done again: and therefore they take special care to record all the deci- sions formerly made against common justice and the general reason of mankind. These under the name of precedents, they produce as authorities, to justify the most iniquitous opinions; and the judges never fail of decreeing accordingly.2 While the notion that Canadian appellate judges slavishly adhere to outdated precedent in a manner contrary to "common justice and the general re ason of mankind" does not accurately describe the current reality, there remains a lively and important debate about the functions, values and limits of "abiding by things decided" in common law systems.3 In this vein, Justices Steel and Freedman in the recent R.
    [Show full text]
  • S.C.C. File No. 38992 in the SUPREME COURT of CANADA (ON APPEAL from the COURT of APPEAL of MANITOBA)
    S.C.C. File No. 38992 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA) BETWEEN: CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION / SOCIÉTÉ RADIO-CANADA Appellant (Moving Party) -and- HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent (Respondent) -and- STANLEY FRANK OSTROWSKI Respondent (Appellant) -and- B.B., SPOUSE OF THE LATE M.D., AND J.D., IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE M.D. Respondents (Interested Parties) -and- ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, CENTRE FOR FREE EXPRESSION, CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF JOURNALISTS, NEWS MEDIA CANADA, COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA / CANADA and AD IDEM / CANADIAN MEDIA LAWYERS ASSOCIATION Interveners FACTUM OF THE RESPONDENT, STANLEY FRANK OSTROWSKI - REDACTED (Pursuant to Rule 42 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada) LOCKYER CAMPBELL POSNER MICHAEL J. SOBKIN 30 St. Clair Ave. West, Suite 103 331 Somerset Street West Toronto, ON M4V 3A1 Ottawa, ON K2P 0J8 Tel: 613.282.1712 James Lockyer, LSO# 16359A Fax: 613.288.2896 Jessica Zita, LSO# 72449R Email: [email protected] Tel: 416.847.2560, ext. 222 Fax: 416.847.2564 Agent for the Counsel for the Respondent, Email: [email protected]; Stanley Frank Ostrowski [email protected] STROSBERG SASSO SUTTS LLP 1561 Ouellette Avenue Windsor, ON N8K 1X5 Harvey T. Strosberg, Q.C., LSO# 12640O Tel: 519.561.6228 Email: [email protected] David Robins, LSO# 42332R Tel: 519.561.6215 Fax: 866.316.5308 Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Respondent, Stanley Frank Ostrowski MLT AIKINS LLP GOWLING WLG (CANADA) LLP 360 Main Street, 30th Floor 160 Elgin Street, Suite 2600 Winnipeg, MB R3C 4G1 Ottawa, ON K1P 1C3 Jonathan B.
    [Show full text]
  • Manitoba Metis Federation Inc. V. Canada (Attorney General)
    SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Manitoba Metis Federation Inc. v. Canada (Attorney DATE: 20130308 General), 2013 SCC 14 DOCKET: 33880 BETWEEN: Manitoba Metis Federation Inc., Yvon Dumont, Billy Jo De La Ronde, Roy Chartrand, Ron Erickson, Claire Riddle, Jack Fleming, Jack McPherson, Don Roulette, Edgar Bruce Jr., Freda Lundmark, Miles Allarie, Celia Klassen, Alma Belhumeur, Stan Guiboche, Jeanne Perrault, Marie Banks Ducharme and Earl Henderson Appellants and Attorney General of Canada and Attorney General of Manitoba Respondents - and - Attorney General for Saskatchewan, Attorney General of Alberta, Métis National Council, Métis Nation of Alberta, Métis Nation of Ontario, Treaty One First Nations and Assembly of First Nations Interveners CORAM: McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Deschamps,* Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver and Karakatsanis JJ. JOINT REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: McLachlin C.J. and Karakatsanis J. (LeBel, Fish, Abella and (paras. 1 to 155) Cromwell JJ. concurring) DISSENTING REASONS: Rothstein J. (Moldaver J. concurring) (paras. 156 to 303) (* Deschamps J. took no part in the judgment.) NOTE: This document is subject to editorial revision before its reproduction in final form in the Canada Supreme Court Reports. MANITOBA METIS FEDERATION v. CANADA (A.G.) Manitoba Metis Federation Inc., Yvon Dumont, Billy Jo De La Ronde, Roy Chartrand, Ron Erickson, Claire Riddle, Jack Fleming, Jack McPherson, Don Roulette, Edgar Bruce Jr., Freda Lundmark, Miles Allarie, Celia Klassen, Alma Belhumeur, Stan Guiboche, Jeanne Perrault, Marie Banks Ducharme and Earl Henderson Appellants v. Attorney General of Canada and Attorney General of Manitoba Respondents and Attorney General for Saskatchewan, Attorney General of Alberta, Métis National Council, Métis Nation of Alberta, Métis Nation of Ontario, Treaty One First Nations and Assembly of First Nations Interveners Indexed as: Manitoba Metis Federation Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Litigation in Canada
    Guide to Litigation in Canada Guide to Litigation in Canada · 1 CONTENTS Introduction: Litigating in Canada………………….... 3 Litigation in Each Province Alberta………………………………………………........ 4 British Columbia……………………………………........ 8 Manitoba……………………………………………........ 11 New Brunswick……………………............................... 13 Newfoundland and Labrador………………………....... 16 Nova Scotia………………………………………............ 19 Ontario……………………………………………........... 20 Prince Edward Island………………………………......... 22 Quebec……………………………………………........... 24 Saskatchewan……………………………………........... 26 About RMC............................................................... 28 INTRODUCTION: LITIGATING IN CANADA Canada has a population of 35 million people which is less than the population of California. It is approximately 3.88 million square miles which makes it the second largest country in the world. It is divided into ten provinces and three territories. Each province and territory has its own government. The capital of Canada is the City of Ottawa where the federal House of Commons and Senate create legislation which applies to the entire country. Each province has its own capital where their legislatures exist and pass laws for their particular province. Canada is a constitutional democracy however, its constitution is made up of a number of statutes, orders-in-council and judicial decisions which interpret these documents. One of the most significant is The Constitution Act, 1867. This act divides different powers between the federal and provincial governments. The Constitution Act, 1867 provides the provinces with the power to administer justice in their own provinces. As such, each province will have its own unique court system and administration to carry out the laws of the land. It is because of these procedural differences that lawyers will typically practice within their own province. While the courts are operated by the province, the judges in civil courts are appointed by the federal government.
    [Show full text]
  • Images of Louis Riel in Contemporary Art and Métis Nationhood
    Whose Hero? Images of Louis Riel in Contemporary Art and Métis Nationhood Catherine L. Mattes A Thesis in The Department of Art History Presented in Partial Frllfilment of the Requirements for the De- of Master of Arts at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada OCatherine L. Mattes, 1998 National Library BiMiothèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington OîtawaON KlAON4 Oaawa ON KlA ON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive Licence ailowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, ioan, distribute or self reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or othewise de celle-ci ne doivent êîre imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation, ABSTRACT Whose Hero? Images of Louis Riel in Contemporary Art and Métis Nationhood Catherine L-Mattes Louis Riel is perhaps one of the most controversial figures in Canadian history. In rnauistream Canadian society, he is often described as a "Canadian hero", a "Father of Codederation", or the "Fomder of Manitobay'- He has become an icon for various organizations, political parties, and cultural groups in Canada Although for many Métis Riel is a "Canadian hero", he is also an important figure for the Métis nation.
    [Show full text]
  • A Tale of Two Courts II: Appeals from the Manitoba Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court of Canada, 1906-1990
    A Tale of Two Courts II: Appeals from the Manitoba Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court of Canada, 1906-1990 Peter McCormick' and Suzanne Maisey" THE PURPOSE OF THIS paper is to consider the history of the Manitoba Court of Appeal, primarily in the context of subsequent appeals from that Court to the Supreme Court of Canada. This paper examines the attributes of the Manitoba Court of Appeal that correlate with the patterns that emerge out of the appeal loss to the Supreme Court of Canada. The period under consideration reaches from the establish- ment of the Manitoba Court at the beginning of the 1906/1907 term to the end of the 1989/90 term, which roughly corresponds with the retirement of Chief Justice Alfred Monnin early in 1990. By fortunate 1991 CanLIIDocs 119 coincidence, this same time period is very closely coincident with the span from the beginning of the Supreme Court Chief Justiceship of Sir Charles Fitzpatrick (June 4, 1906) to the retirement of Chief Justice Brian Dickson — a nice artistic touch by virtue of the fact that Justice Dickson himself served on the Manitoba Court of Appeal for five years. The nine provincial and eleven federal chief justiceships will provide the basic periodicization for the analysis. This paper will focus on the most obvious dimension of the inter- action between a specific court and a higher court — namely, the rate and the patterns of higher court interventions into lower court deci- sions brought before it on appeal. The term "intervention" is used in the sense suggested by Burton Atkins:1 a higher court decision that significantly alters the resolution imposed by the lower court.
    [Show full text]
  • The Manitoba Court of Appeal, 2000–2004: Caseload, Output and Citations
    The Manitoba Court of Appeal, 2000–2004: Caseload, Output and Citations PETER Mc CORMICK* his article revives a series of annual pieces on the Manitoba Court of TAppeal that appeared in Volumes 19 through 22 of this Journal, studying the Court through the collection and examination of statistics about various aspects of its activities. More correctly, there were three such series—one looking at “caseload and output”,1 a second looking at citation practices,2 and a third looking at appeals from the Manitoba Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.3 This article shall combine a brief consideration of all three of these elements. Because it is picking up on these themes after a silence of more than a decade, I will be considering not a single year but four successive terms (2000 through 2003 inclusive), the first four terms of the new century.4 The broader motivation is a profound curiosity about the work and role of the provincial courts of appeal, about what they do and how they do it. The work of the trial courts is conceptually straightforward: they represent a judicial first attempt to ascertain facts against the background of law and achieve a fair resolution of a specific dispute. The work of the Supreme Court of Canada, as a national high court of final appeal, is also conceptually straightforward: its * Professor, University of Lethbridge. 1 Peter McCormick, “Caseload and Output of the Manitoba Court of Appeal 1988" (1990)19(1) M.L.J. 31; Peter McCormick, "Caseload and Output of the Manitoban [sic] Court of Appeal 1989" (1990) 19(3) M.L.J.
    [Show full text]