Ottawa Says It Will Appeal BC Court Decision Granting Land Title to First Nation

The Peace Tower and other buildings are seen on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on March 9, 2025. The Canadian Press/Justin Tang

The federal government says it is appealing a B.C. Supreme Court decision that granted land title rights in Richmond, B.C., to a First Nation based on historical ownership.

B.C.’s NDP government previously confirmed the province will appeal the decision, with Attorney General Niki Sharma saying in a statement it raises “significant legal issues” and “could have significant unintended consequences for fee simple private property rights in B.C.”

The province is currently seeking a stay pending its appeal. Notices of appeal have also been filed by fellow defendants in the case, the City of Richmond, the Tsawwassen First Nation, and the Musqueam Indian Band.

“We need urgent clarity. That’s why we’re appealing,” Eby said Sept. 26 in explaining the province’s decision.

Ian McLeod, a spokesperson with the federal Department of Justice, said in an email that the federal government is also appealing the decision.

Court Decision

Justice Barbara Young’s Aug. 7 decision granted the Cowichan Nation title claim over approximately seven-and-a-half square kilometres of land in Richmond, B.C., including federal and municipal lands.

The lawsuit was originally filed by the Cowichan Tribes in 2019, which argued that parts of the Lower Mainland are part of their historical territory and belong to them. The claims were opposed by the Musqueam and Tsawwassen First Nations, the federal and provincial governments, the City of Richmond, and the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority.

Young suspended the decision for 18 months to give governments and affected parties time to manage the transition.

The ruling holds that aboriginal title predates and can coexist with Crown and private ownership, building on the 1997 Delgamuukw precedent. Young ruled that fee simple title does not automatically extinguish indigenous rights, even when lands have been sold or managed by governments. Ninety-five percent of B.C.’s land lacks any formal treaty with indigenous peoples.

The case signals potential legal uncertainty for property rights across B.C., according to Dwight Newman, professor of constitutional law and indigenous rights law at the University of Saskatchewan. Newman previously told The Epoch Times that future litigation could arise over overlapping aboriginal and private interests, especially for urban, waterfront, rural, and resource-rich properties.

Conservatives Urge Ottawa to Appeal

Polievre told reporters in Ottawa on Sept. 29 that if the Cowichan ruling isn’t overturned, it would “devastate our entire economy.”

“People are not going to build factories, open up jobs, start businesses, or even buy homes if they think that their land could be confiscated and given to someone else,” he said. “So we oppose this ruling, and we call on the federal government to make legal arguments at the appeal level to overturn it.”

Poilievre’s comments came the day after he and Chak Au, Tory MP for Richmond Centre-Marpole, sent a letter to Justice Minister Sean Fraser urging Ottawa to appeal the Cowichan Tribes v. Canada decision, which they said undermines property rights and threatens the nation’s economy.

The letter also said that Minister of Housing Gregor Robertson had “downplayed” the issue when he told Global News last month that private property rights are “not affected” by the decision. Robertson had also remarked that Conservatives are “fear mongering” about the case.

“This decision creates the risk of profound harm, not just to the B.C. economy but to the entire Canadian economy,” the letter stated. “The federal government must argue in court against the Cowichan ruling, which threatens the property rights of Canadians and is already scaring away jobs and investment.”

Poilievre and Au’s letter came after a week of debate at the Union of B.C. Municipalities (UBCM) convention in Victoria, where local leaders, attorneys and provincial leaders argued over the implications of the Cowichan ruling. Local politicians questioned what the decision could mean for council planning, taxation, and governance of lands with overlapping title claims.

B.C. Conservative Leader John Rustad told the UBCM that Young’s ruling creates a situation where private property rights are directly up against aboriginal land title rights and the two can’t coexist. Cowichan Nation lawyer David Rosenberg told the UBCM that the decision won’t place any private property rights in jeopardy and did not directly challenge any private property title.