Supreme Court of Canada Upholds Métis Nation – Saskatchewan’s Right to Pursue Consultation Challenge
Friday, February 28, 2025 - Filed in: General Interest
Background of the Case
The legal battle in this case arose in 2021 when Saskatchewan issued uranium exploration permits to NexGen Energy Ltd. in an area over which MNS claims Aboriginal title and commercial harvesting rights. MNS brought an application arguing that Saskatchewan had breached its constitutional duty to consult by failing to engage with MNS on these specific claims.
Saskatchewan responded by seeking to strike portions of MNS’s application, arguing that it amounted to an abuse of process. The provincial government relied on two prior legal actions:
A chambers judge ruled in Saskatchewan’s favor, concluding that allowing MNS to proceed would constitute an abuse of process. However, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal reversed that decision, allowing MNS to proceed with its claims. Saskatchewan appealed to the SCC, arguing that the issues raised by MNS were duplicative and that the legal status of their claims had not changed since the 1994 Action.
Supreme Court Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed Saskatchewan’s appeal, ruling that there was no abuse of process in MNS pursuing the 2021 application. The key findings of the SCC were:
Significance of the Decision
Conclusion
This Supreme Court ruling represents a victory for MNS and Métis rights advocacy in Canada. It underscores the ongoing obligation of governments to consult with Indigenous groups regarding asserted rights and lands, even in the absence of a formal court ruling on title. Saskatchewan must now engage in meaningful consultation rather than rely on procedural arguments to avoid its constitutional obligations. Moving forward, the case sets a precedent for how courts assess consultation rights for Métis communities in Canada’s legal landscape.
The legal battle in this case arose in 2021 when Saskatchewan issued uranium exploration permits to NexGen Energy Ltd. in an area over which MNS claims Aboriginal title and commercial harvesting rights. MNS brought an application arguing that Saskatchewan had breached its constitutional duty to consult by failing to engage with MNS on these specific claims.
Saskatchewan responded by seeking to strike portions of MNS’s application, arguing that it amounted to an abuse of process. The provincial government relied on two prior legal actions:
- The 1994 Action, in which MNS sought declarations of Aboriginal title and commercial harvesting rights but which was stayed due to non-disclosure of documents.
- The 2020 Action, challenging Saskatchewan’s First Nation and Métis Consultation Policy Framework, which explicitly refused to recognize Métis Aboriginal title and commercial harvesting rights.
A chambers judge ruled in Saskatchewan’s favor, concluding that allowing MNS to proceed would constitute an abuse of process. However, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal reversed that decision, allowing MNS to proceed with its claims. Saskatchewan appealed to the SCC, arguing that the issues raised by MNS were duplicative and that the legal status of their claims had not changed since the 1994 Action.
Supreme Court Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed Saskatchewan’s appeal, ruling that there was no abuse of process in MNS pursuing the 2021 application. The key findings of the SCC were:
- Duty to Consult Exists Pending Claim Resolution: The SCC reaffirmed that the Crown's duty to consult applies even when Aboriginal title claims remain unresolved. The government cannot ignore consultation obligations simply because a legal claim has been stayed or remains outstanding.
- Distinct Legal Issues: The SCC found that while there was some overlap between the 1994 Action, the 2020 Action, and the 2021 Application, they were distinct legal proceedings with different focuses. The 2021 Application was specifically a judicial review of Saskatchewan’s consultation process, not a claim to establish Aboriginal title.
- Abuse of Process Not Established: The SCC held that parallel legal proceedings addressing different aspects of Métis rights do not automatically constitute an abuse of process. Courts must avoid striking pleadings that are legitimate exercises of constitutional rights, especially in cases involving Indigenous claims.
Significance of the Decision
- Stronger Métis Consultation Rights: The SCC’s ruling reinforces that Métis Nations have a right to be consulted on land and resource decisions affecting their asserted rights. Governments cannot evade consultation simply by refusing to recognize Métis Aboriginal title.
- Limits on Government Discretion: Saskatchewan’s 2010 Consultation Policy, which excludes Métis claims to Aboriginal title from the duty to consult, now faces renewed legal scrutiny. The ruling signals that provincial policies cannot override constitutional obligations.
- Judicial Efficiency vs. Indigenous Rights: The decision highlights the need for courts to balance judicial efficiency with the rights of Indigenous groups to pursue legal remedies. Procedural challenges, such as claims of “abuse of process,” must not be used to sidestep substantive Indigenous rights claims.
- Potential Impact on Resource Development: Resource companies operating in Saskatchewan may now face greater scrutiny regarding consultation obligations when obtaining permits in areas with unresolved Métis land claims.
Conclusion
This Supreme Court ruling represents a victory for MNS and Métis rights advocacy in Canada. It underscores the ongoing obligation of governments to consult with Indigenous groups regarding asserted rights and lands, even in the absence of a formal court ruling on title. Saskatchewan must now engage in meaningful consultation rather than rely on procedural arguments to avoid its constitutional obligations. Moving forward, the case sets a precedent for how courts assess consultation rights for Métis communities in Canada’s legal landscape.