NCN retained Maurice Law Barristers & Solicitors to advance four (4) specific claims against Canada as follows:

(1) Agricultural Benefits Claim

(2) Treaty 5 Disparity Claim

(3) Natural Resources Transfer Agreement (NRTA) claim

(4) Annuities claim

 

Specific Claims address historical grievances of First Nations against Canada, including breaches of treaty promises and misadministration of reserve lands or other assets of First Nations. The types of claims First Nations can bring against Canada are limited to those specified under the Specific Claims Policy and the Specific Claims Tribunal Act, S.C. 2008, c. 22 (the “Act”). A main advantage of the specific claims process however is that Canada cannot rely on usual Crown defences that a given historical claim is time-barred, and therefore damages are not available to the First Nation to recover, even if the claim otherwise has merit in law.

Once a specific claim is submitted to Canada, the Act sets out two key deadlines for Canada to review and respond to the claim submitted. The first deadline for Canada is what is called the “Minimum Standard” review period. Canada has six (6) months following receipt of a specific claim to review the claim for completeness (eg: historical documents enclosed are legible; allegations against Canada are listed; a BCR from Chief and Council provides authorization to submit the claim). Once a claim is deemed filed with Canada after the 6 months’ review period, Canada then has a further three (3) years to decide whether to negotiate the claim or not from that date. If the claim is not accepted for negotiation by Canada – in full or in part – by this time, a First Nation then has the option to go before the Specific Claims Tribunal to obtain a binding final decision. That decision is subject to judicial review to the Federal Court of Appeal up to the Supreme Court of Canada, as necessary.

 

Agricultural Benefits Claim (i.e. Cows & Plows)

Status update: NCN’s expert historical research was received by Canada on March 21, 2025 under Canada’s expedited process for Treaty 5 Agricultural benefits claims. Canada is currently undergoing the 6-month review period following which they will provide the claim’s deemed filing date with Canada, if the claim is accepted for filing (Canada’s deadline is September 21, 2025).

Under the expedited review process for Treaty 5 Agricultural benefits claims, Canada will not take the usual 3.5 years to respond to whether a claim was accepted for negotiation or not, but instead, aims to take half that time before a response – approximately 1.5 years for review. Given NCN has already conducted the historical research now with Canada, this should help speed up Canada’s review time, or else help Canada to do so in the 1.5 years’ timeline given Nations such as NCN who have Band division considerations might require further review time on Canada’s part past the 1.5-year anticipated timeline.

Should the claim be filed with Canada come September 2025, another year for review is September 21, 2026. This represents the expected latest date that Canada would need to respond to accept the claim or not for negotiation, unless the beneficiary question in NCN’s case requires that Canada takes longer.

Towards supporting Canada in a speedier review of NCN’s Band division issue, Maurice Law is currently in the process of reviewing treaty paylists to determine the most appropriate means for ensuring that compensation for this agricultural benefits’ claim is equitably apportioned for the benefit of NCN. NCN’s position on the beneficiary issue and a brief legal argument will be submitted to Canada in June of 2025, further to the historical research shared in March of 2025.

Basis for claim: Treaty 5 promised NCN agricultural benefits or other treaty benefits in lieu of the agricultural benefits promise. However, Canada only every provided a onetime distribution of the promised smaller sized implements (hoes, spades, axes) in 1909, and never distributed any ploughs, harrows, scythes, or the treaty cattle, though NCN repeatedly asked for fulfillment of the promise. To the extent that small quantities of agricultural goods were only ever delivered to NCN, the “once-for-all” infusion of seed capital to establish a commercial farming operation as promised under Treaty 5 is clearly not in keeping with the delivery of some hand tools to support subsistence gardening only. The Crown therefore breached Treaty 5 and the honour of the Crown.

 

Treaty 5 Disparity Claim (Later Adhesion – 1908)

Status update: Dr. Victor Lytwyn is currently working on the production of the historical report for NCN. While he initially expected to have a draft completed in November of 2024 or before, Dr. Lytwyn recommended that he also research the United Church Archives in Toronto, given it was in that archive that he discovered evidence that was crucial for the signatories and adherents to Treaty 5 in the 1875-1876 period. He expects to complete his expert historical report by around June 6, 2025.

Once that is received, Maurice Law will draft the specific claim legal argument over the summer for submission to Canada. This claim would be one of if not the first Treaty 5 Disparity Claim to be submitted from a First Nation from the 1908-1910 period.

Basis for claim: it is asserted tht Canada breached the Honour of the Crown and its fiduciary duties owed to Treaty 5 First Nations by failing to offer the same quantum of reserve lands or initial gratuities under the terms of Treaty 5 as were made available to Treaty signatories to Treaties 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. The other Numbered Treaties signed contemporaneously to Treaty 5 received 4 times more reserve land and 2.4 or 3 times more initial gratuities per person than the Nations who adhered to Treaty 5. There is no legal justification for offering less land quantum or payments to Treaty 5 First Nations than to any other Numbered Treaty signatories. In the case of NCN (adhered to Treaty 5 in 1908) and other later in time adhesions (1908-1910), there is also the unique issue of Canada having considered that NCN and other adherents might adhere the more generous Treaty 10, including to its 640 acre per family of five reserve term and $12 gratuity (rather than 160 acres per family of five and $5 gratuity under Treaty 5), but decided to have NCN and other adherents in this period adhere to Treaty 5 instead so that the Canadian government could save on costs.

 

Natural Resources Transfer Agreement (“NRTA”)

Status update: the NCN NRTA claim was accepted as filed with Canada on February 5, 2024. Canada now has until February 4, 2027 to respond on whether the claim will be accepted for negotiation or not (i.e. Canada’s three-year claim review period under the Act is currently underway).

In the meantime, Maurice Law currently represents one First Nation from Saskatchewan before the Tribunal where the question of whether the NRTA claim fits within the Specific Claims Policy is being decided. Most recently, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) released its decision in Waterhen Lake First Nation v His Majesty the King In Right of Canada, 2025 FCA 49 on February 28, 2025, upholding the Specific Claims Tribunal finding that this claim does not fit within the scope of the specific claims policy, meaning it cannot be heard before the Tribunal. Maurice Law on behalf of Waterhen filed leave to appeal that decision to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) on April 29, 2025. The Crown then has 30 days to file a response, then Waterhen another 10 days to file a rely, which would be by mid-June or so. Typically, then it would be another few months before the SCC decides whether to hear the appeal or not, so this decision on whether to grant leave to hear the claim may be made by October of 2025.

If it is the case that Claimant First Nations cannot bring this claim before the Specific Claims Tribunal to be decided on, the next step would be to file a NRTA class action instead in a court of law where there are no such scope issues.

Basis for claim: The NRTA claim alleges that Canada breached its treaty, fiduciary, and honourable obligations owed to the First Nation when it enacted the 1930 NRTA in Manitoba, which abrogated the First Nation’s commercial hunting, fishing, and trapping rights under Treaty 5. This Crown taking of commercial interests in fact (de facto) was done without consultation with the First Nation and without the payment of any compensation.

 

Annuities Indexation Claim

Status update: the NCN Annuities Indexing claim was accepted as filed with Canada on July 8, 2024. Canada now has until July 8, 2027 to respond on whether the claim will be accepted for negotiation or not (i.e. Canada’s three-year claim review period under the Act is currently underway).

Basis for claim: The Annuities Indexation claim asserts that Canada failed to adjust the Treaty 5 annual annuity payments of $5 to offset the impacts of inflation and maintain the real value or purchasing power of $5 over time, to the point that this substantive promise has been relegated to an empty or hallow treaty promise, contrary to the treaty promise that annuities would be provided in perpetuity. Equitable compensation for the failure to provide the indexed Annuity Payments amount is sought from when inflation became a known reality to present.

 

Maurice Law Barristers & Solicitors is a firm based out of Calgary with offices and lawyers located across Canada, including an office based in Winnipeg with three (3) lawyers and two (2) articling students at present. Maurice Law has extensive expertise with specific claims and has a proven track record with both in negotiations with the Specific Claims Branch (Canada) and before the Specific Claims Tribunal (an independent tribunal made up of judges) for advancing and settling ground-breaking specific claims.