FIRST APPLICATION: Whether duty to consult and accommodate triggered by Crown conduct that continues into future or by projects or activities that violate or adversely affect Indigenous rights — Whether duty includes all impacts that may occur into future, even if they originated in past — Whether past and ongoing violations of Indigenous rights or adverse effects to Indigenous rights from project or set of activities for which no complete remedy may ever be available should inform accommodations required.
SECOND APPLICATION: Aboriginal peoples — Treaty rights — Duty to consult — Duty to accommodate — Relicensing of existing project — First Nations invited to consult on relicensing — Relevance of existing impacts in consultation on relicensing — Proper approach to cumulative effects when considering reasonableness of accommodation — How existing impact for which no complete remedy may exist affects accommodation — Whether compensation required to accommodate future effects when project cannot be readily altered to lower effects. — dismissed 11/20/2025 — Supreme Advocacy acted as agent for the Applicant.
Read the lower court decision from the SKCA here.