R. v. Castonguay (R.) et al., (2003) 265 N.B.R.(2d) 105 (TD)

• Judge: Guerette, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: August 05, 2003
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: (2003), 265 N.B.R.(2d) 105 (TD);2003 NBQB 325

R. v. Castonguay (R.) (2003), 265 N.B.R.(2d) 105 (TD);

    265 R.N.-B.(2e) 105; 695 A.P.R. 105

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Temp. Cite: [2003] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. SE.030

Roger Castonguay and François Faucher (appellants) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)

(C/CA/1/2003; 2003 NBQB 325)

Indexed As: R. v. Castonguay (R.) et al.

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Campbellton

Guerette, J.

August 5, 2003.

Summary:

Faucher was charged with unlawfully cutting down timber from Crown land. Castonguay was charged with unlawful possession of timber from Crown lands. They claimed a constitutional exemption (Constitution Act, s. 35) based on their status as Métis.

The New Brunswick Provincial Court, in a decision reported at 257 N.B.R.(2d) 67; 674 A.P.R. 67, rejected the defence and con­victed both defendants. The defendants appealed.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, dismissed the appeal.

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 2.1

General - Métis defined - Faucher was charged with unlawfully cutting down timber from Crown lands - Castonguay was charged with unlawful possession of timber from Crown lands - The offences occurred in St. Quentin - They claimed a constitutional exemption (Constitution Act, s. 35) based on their status as Métis - The trial judge held that to succeed the defen­dants had to produce convincing evidence on a balance of probabilities that: (a) there existed today a Métis community in the St. Quentin region of New Brunswick; (b) the current Métis community existed in con­tinuity with an historic St. Quentin region Métis community; (c) they self-identify as Métis and are members of that community and share with the community a common aboriginal ancestry - The trial judge held that the defendants' claim to Métis status was devoid of any merit at law and con­victed them - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, dis­missed the defendants' appeal.

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 806

Personal or legal rights - General - Métis - [See Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 2.1 ].

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 6012

Aboriginal rights - General - Evidence and proof - [See Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 2.1 ].

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 6025

Aboriginal rights - Particular rights - Har­vesting trees - [See Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 2.1 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Powley (S.) et al. (2003), 308 N.R. 201; 177 O.A.C. 201 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 4].

R. v. Powley (S.) et al. (2001), 141 O.A.C. 121; 40 C.R.(5th) 221 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Chiasson (O.) (2001), 239 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 619 A.P.R. 1 (Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Blais (E.L.J.) (2001), 156 Man.R.(2d) 53; 246 W.A.C. 53 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Howse (J.G.) et al., [2002] B.C.T.C. 235 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Schriver (1983), 49 N.B.R.(2d) 364; 129 A.P.R. 364 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Côté (F.) et al., [1996] 3 S.C.R. 139; 202 N.R. 161, refd to. [para. 22].

Counsel:

Terrence P. Lenihan, for the appellants;

Pierre Castonguay, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on August 5, 2003, before Guerette, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, Judicial District of Campbellton, who orally delivered the following judgment on the same date.