R. v. Marshall

"R. v. Marshall (No. 1)" [1999] 3 S.C.R. 456 and "R. v. Marshall (No. 2)" [1999] 3 S.C.R. 533 are two decisions given by the Supreme Court of Canada on a single case regarding a treaty right to fish. The Court held in the first decision that the famous Donald Marshall's catching and selling of eels was valid under 1760 and 1761 treaties between the aboriginals and the colonial government, and that any licensing system or regulatory prohibitions would infringe the treaty right. In the second decision the Court elaborated the extension of aboriginal treaty rights stating that they are still subject to Canadian law. Both decisions proved highly controversial. The first elicited the anger from the non-aboriginal fishing community for giving seemingly complete immunity to aboriginals to fish. The second decision, which was claimed to be an "elaboration", was seen as a retreat from the first decision and angered aboriginal communities. The second decision was won on a motion for re-hearing the case brought by fishermen's associations in which the court elaborated in particular about such things as the relationship between treaty rights and conservation that had been more implicit in the first decision.

External links

* [http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1999/vol3/html/1999scr3_0456.html Supreme Court Reporter of R. v. Marshall (No. 1)]
* [http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1999/vol3/html/1999scr3_0533.html Supreme Court Reporter of R. v. Marshall (No. 2)]