Vaughn Palmer: Judge's refusal to reopen Cowichan case a chilling message to B.C. landowners

Part of the Cowichan First Nation's claimed area in southeast Richmond.

Article content

VICTORIA — B.C. Supreme Court Justice Barbara Young sent a chilling message to B.C. landowners when she refused to reopen the case where she designated Aboriginal title over several hundred hectares of private land in Richmond.

Article content

Montrose Properties, owner of the largest tract of private land, argued it had never received any formal notification that its fee-simple (private) title could be affected by the outcome.

Article content

Article content

Article content

This being the first case where Aboriginal title was applied to private as well as Crown land in B.C., the federal, provincial and Richmond city governments all supported reopening the application.

Article content

Article content

Montrose argued that the finding of Aboriginal title affected the use of its lands, the ability to sell or develop them, and the applicability of provincial laws, among other factors.

Article content

Those arguments got nowhere with Young, who made the finding of Aboriginal title in favour of the Cowichan Nation last August.

Article content

Young didn’t deny back then that her designation of Aboriginal title “may give rise to some uncertainty for the fee-simple titleholders, and it may have consequences for their interests.”

Article content

Nor did she rule out that the Cowichan Nation might someday seek to take over all the private land included in the designation of Aboriginal title.

Article content

“They are not pursuing exclusive use and occupancy of privately owned lands at this time,” wrote Young. “What they may choose to do in future negotiations or litigation is speculative.”

Article content

Despite those far-reaching implications, she found (contrary to the argument of the provincial government) that there was no need for private landowners to have formal standing in her courtroom. She upheld that position in the decision filed June 29.

Article content

Article content

This time, she criticized Montrose for failing to intervene in the case at an earlier stage, then filing the application to reopen after the years of proceedings were concluded.

Article content

Article content

“Although Montrose did not have formal notice of the proceeding, it had knowledge of the proceedings, and chose not to apply to be added as party until long after the conclusion of the trial,” she wrote. “Montrose’s application is dismissed as an abuse of process for relitigating.”

Article content

She suggested the company could join the federal, provincial and city governments in challenging her decision at the B.C. Court of Appeal.

Article content

Yet as the Montrose filing noted, if Young did not grant it standing at her B.C. Supreme Court proceeding, the company “will have no standing at the Court of Appeal unless it obtains leave to intervene.”

Article content

Young’s latest decision accepted a key argument made by the plaintiff Cowichan Nation in opposing Montrose.

Article content

“I agree with the plaintiffs that allowing this application could open the floodgates for numerous other private landowners and persons with commercial or other interests in the Cowichan Title Lands to seek to join the litigation,” she wrote in another swipe at Montrose.