Editor’s Note: Corrigendum released on December 20, 2010. Original judgment has been corrected with text of corrigendum appended. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation v. British Columbia (Agriculture and Lands), 2010 BCSC 1699 Date: 20101201 Docket: S090848 Registry: Vancouver Between: 2010 BCSC 1699 (CanLII) Chief Robert Chamberlin, Chief of the Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation, on his own behalf and on behalf of all members of the Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation Plaintiff And Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia as represented by the Minister of Agriculture and Lands and Attorney General of Canada Defendants Corrected Judgment: The text of the judgment was corrected on the front page and at paragraphs 19, 22, 23, 27, and 94 on December 20, 2010. Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice Slade Reasons for Judgment In Chambers Counsel for the Plaintiff: J.J. Camp, Q.C. R. Mogerman K. Robertson Counsel for the Defendant, J. Sullivan Province of British Columbia: S. Knowles J. Oliphant Counsel for the Defendant, H. Wruck, Q.C. Attorney General of Canada: S. Postman A. Semple Place and Date of Hearing: Vancouver, B.C. April 13-16 & 19-21, 2010 Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation v. British Columbia (Agriculture and Lands) Page 2 Further Written Submissions: July 7 - 8, 2010 November 18, 22-24, 2010 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, B.C. December 1, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 4 II. COMMON ISSUES............................................................................................. 5 III. THE PROPOSED CLASS: SECTION 4(1)(b) - IS THERE AN IDENTIFIABLE CLASS OF TWO OR MORE PERSONS? ................................................................. 8 Objections .............................................................................................................. 8 2010 BCSC 1699 (CanLII) Law......................................................................................................................... 8 Aboriginal Peoples ............................................................................................... 11 Infringement of Aboriginal Rights ......................................................................... 14 Aboriginal Rights and Aboriginal Peoples ............................................................ 14 The British Columbia Treaty Commission Process .............................................. 17 Fishing Rights in the Broughton Archipelago: Disputed Existence of the Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation as a Holder of Aboriginal Fishing Rights ............................................................................................................................. 20 Historical and Ethnographic Writings.................................................................... 21 Tribes and Bands ................................................................................................. 26 Other Actions........................................................................................................ 27 Aboriginal Rights: The Proper Claimant ............................................................... 29 First Nations Aquaculture Projects ....................................................................... 30 IV. OTHER CERTIFICATION CRITERIA............................................................ 35 Certification Criteria.............................................................................................. 35 Section 4(1)(a): Do the Pleadings Disclose a Cause of Action?........................... 36 Objections......................................................................................................... 36 Law ................................................................................................................... 37 Conclusions of Law, Sustenance Rights and Inadequate Description of Claims: .......................................................................................................... 37 Justiciability: Declaration and Injunction........................................................ 38 Damages....................................................................................................... 40 Collateral Attack ............................................................................................ 40 Standing........................................................................................................ 42 Species Specificity ........................................................................................ 42 Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation v. British Columbia (Agriculture and Lands) Page 3 Dissention Among the Class ......................................................................... 44 Section 4(1)(c): Do the claims of the class members raise common issues, whether or not those common issues predominate over issues affecting only individual members? ............................................................................................ 44 Objections......................................................................................................... 44 Law ................................................................................................................... 45 Prematurity ....................................................................................................... 47 Aggregation of Damages .................................................................................. 51 Sections 4(1)(d) and 4(2): Is a class proceeding the preferable procedure for the fair and efficient resolution of the common issues?.............................................. 55 Objections......................................................................................................... 55 2010 BCSC 1699 (CanLII) Law ................................................................................................................... 57 Preferability: General Principles .................................................................... 57 The Three Goals of Class Proceedings......................................................... 58 i) Access to Justice.................................................................................... 59 ii) Behaviour Modification........................................................................... 59 iii) Judicial Economy .................................................................................. 60 4(2)(a): Do the common issues predominate over individual issues? .................. 61 4(2)(b): Do class members have a valid interest in controlling separate actions? 69 4(2)(c): Will the class proceeding involve claims that are or have been the subject of other proceedings?........................................................................................... 69 4(2)(d): Are other means of Resolving the Claims More Practical or Efficient?.... 70 Industry Organizations, Judicial Review, Negotiation, and the Cohen Commission...................................................................................................... 71 Preferability, and No Litigation ...................................................................... 71 Declaratory Relief and Preferability .................................................................. 73 Is a Representative Proceeding Mandatory and/or Preferable? ....................... 75 The opt-out provisions ...................................................................................... 80 Unfairness to Fish Farming First Nations.......................................................... 80 4(2)(e): Would the administration of a class proceeding be manageable, or would it create greater difficulties than those likely to be experienced if the relief were sought through other means?............................................................................... 81 Section 4(1)(e): Is there a representative plaintiff who will fairly represent the class, has produced a workable litigation plan, and does not have a conflict with other class members on the common issues? ..................................................... 83 Law ................................................................................................................... 83 General Principles......................................................................................... 83 Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation v. British Columbia (Agriculture and Lands) Page 4 Conflicts and Dissent .................................................................................... 86 V. DISPOSITION................................................................................................... 87 I. INTRODUCTION [1] This is an application for certification of this proceeding as a class action. The proposed representative plaintiff, Chief Robert Chamberlin, is the elected chief of an aboriginal collective known as the Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation (“KAFN”). Members of this community, like their ancestors, are said to be sustained by their access to the fishery in an area known as the Broughton Archipelago. [2] Numerous other aboriginal collectives, constituted as Bands under the Indian 2010 BCSC 1699 (CanLII) Act, and generally known as “First Nations” are sustained by the marine resources of the Broughton Archipelago. [3] The KAFN and the other First Nations which assert aboriginal fishing rights