R. v. Lavigne (G.), Jr., (2007) 319 N.B.R.(2d) 261 (TD)

• Judge: McIntyre, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: August 04, 2005
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: (2007), 319 N.B.R.(2d) 261 (TD);2007 NBQB 171

R. v. Lavigne (G.) (2007), 319 N.B.R.(2d) 261 (TD);

    319 R.N.-B.(2e) 261; 823 A.P.R. 261

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

[French language version follows English language version]

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

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

Temp. Cite: [2007] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MY.027

Renvoi temp.: [2007] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MY.027

Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Gerald Lavigne Jr. (respondent)

(B/M/09/05; 2007 NBQB 171; 2007 NBBR 171)

Indexed As: R. v. Lavigne (G.), Jr.

Répertorié: R. v. Lavigne (G.), Jr.

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Bathurst

McIntyre, J.

May 17, 2007.

Summary:

Résumé:

The accused was charged with: (a) unlawfully having in his possession in or upon a resort of wildlife, a firearm during the closed season for hunting, contrary to and in violation of s. 42(1)(a) of the Fish and Wildlife Act (N.B.); and (b) unlawfully hunting moose, deer or bear without being the holder of a valid license, contrary to and in violation of s. 32(1)(b) of the Act. In defence, the accused invoked s. 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, and said that he was an aboriginal and that he had an aboriginal right "to hunt and put food on my table and for my family". The accused was not registered as an Indian under the Indian Act (Can.) and did not live on a reserve.

The New Brunswick Provincial Court, in a decision reported 283 N.B.R.(2d) 298; 740 A.P.R. 298, accepted the accused's defence and declared him not guilty. The Crown appealed.

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

Fish and Game - Topic 809

Indian, Inuit and Métis rights - General principles - Aboriginal or treaty rights - Proof of - [See both Fish and Game - Topic 826 ].

Fish and Game - Topic 824

Indian, Inuit and Métis rights - Definitions - Indian defined - [See both Fish and Game - Topic 826 ].

Fish and Game - Topic 826

Indian, Inuit and Métis rights - Definitions - Aboriginal defined - The accused was charged with provincial hunting offences - In defence, the accused invoked s. 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, said that he was an aboriginal and claimed that he had an aboriginal right to hunt for food which devolved unto him from being a Mi'kmaq - The accused was not registered as an Indian under the Indian Act (Can.) and did not live on a reserve - The trial judge accepted the defence and acquitted the accused - The accused was an aboriginal where he established aboriginal ancestry going back to 1803, adherence to an aboriginal lifestyle (hunting, fishing, powwows, spiritual activities, etc.), including self-identification as an aboriginal, and community acceptance at a local level, particularly from the Pabineau First Nation Band - There was "a sufficient and substantial connection with a tribe" - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, upheld the decision - See paragraphs 29 to 51.

Fish and Game - Topic 826

Indian, Inuit and Métis rights - Definitions - Aboriginal defined - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, held that, although the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Powley dealt with a Métis case, the three criteria applied in that case, namely self-identity, ancestral connection and acceptance by the modern community, were equally applicable to the question of who is an Indian under s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 - See paragraphs 29 to 51.

Fish and Game - Topic 843

Indian, Inuit and Métis rights - Right to hunt - Extent of right - The accused was charged with provincial hunting offences - The events took place "along the Nepisiguit River" and, if not on the Pabineau First Nation Reserve, then on Crown land traditionally occupied by members of the community living on the Reserve - In defence, the accused invoked s. 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, said that he was an aboriginal and claimed that he had an aboriginal right to hunt for food which devolved unto him from being a Mi'kmaq - The accused was not registered as an Indian under the Indian Act (Can.) and did not live on a reserve - The trial judge accepted the defence and acquitted the accused - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, upheld the decision, adding that there was no evidence that the Pabineau First Nation Band had in any way regulated the aboriginal rights to hunt either on reserve land or on off reserve land recognized as historical hunting grounds of the Mi'kmaq from the Pabineau reserve - See paragraphs 52 to 61.

Fish and Game - Topic 849

Indian, Inuit and Métis rights - Right to hunt - Crown lands - Occupied - [See Fish and Game - Topic 843 ].

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 2

General - Indian defined - [See both Fish and Game - Topic 826 ].

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 506

Rights - Constitution Act, 1982, s. 35 - Interpretation - [See both Fish and Game - Topic 826 ].

Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 6012

Aboriginal rights - Evidence and proof - [See both Fish and Game - Topic 826 ].

Chasse et pêche - Cote 809

Droits des Indiens, des Inuits et des Métis - Principes généraux - Droits autochtones ou issus de traités - Preuve - [Voir Fish and Game - Topic 809 ].

Chasse et pêche - Cote 824

Droits des Indiens, des Inuits et des Métis - Définitions - Indien - [Voir Fish and Game - Topic 824 ].

Chasse et pêche - Cote 826

Droits des Indiens, des Inuits et des Métis - Définitions - Autochtone - [Voir Fish and Game - Topic 826 ].

Chasse et pêche - Cote 843

Droits des Indiens, des Inuits et des Métis - Droit de chasser - Étendue du droit - [Voir Fish and Game - Topic 843 ].

Chasse et pêche - Cote 849

Droits des Indiens, des Inuits et des Métis - Droit de chasser - Terres de la Couronne - Occupées - [Voir Fish and Game - Topic 849 ].

Indiens, Inuits et Métis - Cote 2

Généralités - Définition du mot "Indien" - [Voir Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 2 ].

Indiens, Inuits et Métis - Cote 506

Droits - Loi constitutionnelle de 1982, art. 35 - Interprétation - [Voir Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 506 ].

Indiens, Inuits et Métis - Cote 6012

Droits autochtones - Preuve - [Voir Indians, Inuit and Métis - Topic 6012 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Powley (S.) et al., [2003] 2 S.C.R. 207; 308 N.R. 201; 177 O.A.C. 201; 2003 SCC 43, consd. [para. 30].

R. v. Acker (K.J.) (2004), 281 N.B.R.(2d) 275; 736 A.P.R. 275 (Prov. Ct.), affd. 2006 NBQB 77, dist. [para. 39].

R. v. Marshall (D.J.), Jr., [1999] 3 S.C.R. 533; 247 N.R. 306; 179 N.S.R.(2d) 1; 553 A.P.R. 1, consd. [para. 53].

Delgamuukw et al. v. British Columbia et al., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010; 220 N.R 161; 99 B.C.A.C. 161; 162 W.A.C. 161, consd. [para. 54].

R. v. Bernard (J.) (2003), 262 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 688 A.P.R. 1; 2003 NBCA 55, affd. [2005] 2 S.C.R. 220; 336 N.R. 22; 287 N.B.R.(2d) 206; 750 A.P.R. 206; 2005 SCC 43, consd. [para. 56].

Statutes Noticed:

Constitution Act, 1982, sect. 35 [para. 2].

Counsel:

Avocats:

William Richards, for the appellant;

D. Bruce Clarke, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on July 19, July 26 and August 4, 2005, by McIntyre, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, Judicial District of Bathurst, who delivered the following decision on May 17, 2007.