Aboriginal and Environmental Law

We have a special interest in assisting Indigenous governments with regulatory hearings, legislative reviews, and court matters.

• While the effects of UNDRIP evolve, First Nations still face increased incursions by industry in their territories, making their establishing rights and title a continuing necessity. In the years to come, we are honoured to assist Haida Nation and other Indigenous governments in proving their aboriginal rights and title.
• In 2025, we secured a landmark ruling confirming that all Canadian domestic law—including British Columbia legislation and the common law—must, where possible, be interpreted consistently with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). The BC Court of Appeal further confirmed that courts may determine whether a law of British Columbia conflicts with UNDRIP. Where such an inconsistency arises, section 3 of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act
  (DRIPA) requires that the Province consult and cooperate with Indigenous peoples to bring the law into alignment with UNDRIP: Gitxaala Nation v. British Columbia (Chief Gold Commissioner), 2025 BCCA 430. The SCC has granted leave to appeal.
• In 2025, we launched a constitutional action on behalf of Heiltsuk Nation against the RCMP. The claim alleges a breach of section 15 of the Charter—the right to equality—arising from the RCMP’s refusal to enforce Heiltsuk bylaws enacted under the Indian Act. This failure carries national significance. Across Canada, First Nations rely on bylaw enforcement to make self-government real, not symbolic. When police decline to enforce Indian Act bylaws, they deny First Nations the same protection routinely afforded to non-Indigenous communities. For Heiltsuk, the consequences reach far beyond jurisdictional theory. The RCMP’s inaction has undermined Heiltsuk’s ability to govern its reserve and has weakened community safety on reserve. The harm falls most heavily on Heiltsuk women, whose safety depends on the effective enforcement of Heiltsuk law.
• Between 2022 and 2025, we advanced human rights claims on behalf of members of Heiltsuk Nation which exposed the daily systemic discrimination that Indigenous peoples face: by banks, the police, and retailers. All cases were settled successfully with Indigenous-specific remedies, including compensation for injury to dignity, contributions to address harms to the community, and attendances at a traditional Heiltsuk washing ceremony (to make things right). (Unfortunately, in the Max Johnson case, the constables who handcuffed Mr. Johnson and his granddaughter refused to attend a washing ceremony alongside the Vancouver Police Board, and that attendance remains under dispute.) See our Focus page on Administrative and Human Rights Litigation (here).
• In 2023, we successfully upheld decisions made by Heiltsuk Nation’s joint leadership (traditional and elected) under their traditional laws, Gvilas, to bar a non-member from rights to access their community. The Federal Court agreed that it did not have jurisdiction to review a decision made under Indigenous law: George v. Heiltsuk First Nation, 2023 FC 1705.
• In 2019, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act came into force in British Columbia, and in 2021 the Interpretation Act was amended to require that all enactments be construed consistently with the U.N. Declaration. Our firm is assisting Indigenous governments to realize their governance rights and their jurisdiction under the U.N. Declaration in relation to BC and Federal laws. Our work includes arguing the application of the U.N. Declaration to the failure of the BC Gold Commissioner to meet its duty to consult Gitxaala Nation prior to granting mineral tenures: Gitxaala Nation v. British Columbia (Chief Gold Commissioner), 2023 BCSC 1680. Gitxaala was successful in establishing a Crown duty to consult prior to the staking of mineral claims, which has led to a mineral tenure regime law reform process. An issue for appeal was whether the Crown has a legal duty to consult about inconsistencies between BC laws (including the common law) and UNDRIP. 
• In 2017 and 2018, we represented First Nations in national consultations on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (2012) (now replaced with the Impact Assessment Act), the Navigation Protection Act, the Fisheries Act, the Pilotage Act, the National Energy Board Act, and the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act bill (now the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act).
• In 2014 and 2015, we represented Adams Lake Indian Band, a number of landowners, and a ranch owner in the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Pipeline regulatory review.
• In 2012-2014, we represented Heiltsuk First Nation before the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Joint Review Panel, and in 2015-2016, we represented Heiltsuk First Nation and Kitasoo/Xai’xais during a judicial review before the Federal Court of Appeal, and successfully challenged the decisions of the National Energy Board and government to allow the building of the pipeline.
• In 2010 and 2011, Ng Ariss Fong in conjunction with Songbird Law Corporation, represented Heiltsuk First Nation before the Cohen Commission on the Inquiry into the Decline of Fraser River Sockeye Salmon.

We believe in supporting our clients in building and maintaining strong governance structures that reflect their Indigenous laws. In this work, we assist in designing governance structures, drafting governance documents, providing training, and over time, increasing the merging and implementing of Indigenous laws in the exercise of governance procedures consistent with Aboriginal rights and title.

“The Spawn” by KC Hall