BC Supreme Court decision sparks debate over private property rights and Aboriginal title
A recent BC Supreme Court decision granting the Cowichan Tribes Aboriginal title to 800 acres in southeast Richmond has left local landowners and industry stakeholders grappling with unprecedented uncertainty over private property rights.
In a letter distributed this week, Richmond mayor Malcolm Brodie warned that the ruling “may compromise the status and validity of your ownership,” inviting affected residents to a public information session to address what he called “serious implications” for the region’s land system.
“I believe it is one of the most consequential rulings in the history of the country,” Brodie said, adding, “I think potentially that it undermines the entire land system that we have in this province, and for much of the country itself.”
Brodie argued that property owners were not fairly represented in the legal process: “If you’re going to talk about someone’s land, surely they have the right to be there, to have representation, to speak about it,” he said.
The August decision, delivered by Justice Barbara Young after what has been called the longest trial in Canadian history, found that Crown grants of private land—known as fee simple—did not extinguish Cowichan Aboriginal title and instead constituted “unjustifiable infringements.”
The court suspended its declaration for 18 months to allow for negotiations between the Cowichan, federal government, and the City of Richmond.
While the Cowichan Tribes have stated they do not seek to displace ordinary British Columbians, chief negotiator Robert Morales said, “There are corporate interests that are part of what we’re disputing. Corporations, or the governments who have privately held land as a corporation or as a government, I think that’s a different issue.”
The City of Richmond and the provincial government have both filed notices of appeal. BC attorney general Niki Sharma said in a statement, “This ruling could have significant unintended consequences for fee simple private property rights in BC that must be reconsidered by a higher court.”
Brodie, meanwhile, called on senior governments to “do your job” and “take the position that needs to be taken to protect people and businesses, and investments, that are… totally dependent upon the results of this court case.”
The decision has already affected real estate activity in the area, with Brodie noting, “If you are a purchaser of property, you are not going to buy one of these properties because now you have notice of Aboriginal title. You can’t say you were surprised if you buy a property expecting a fee simple title.”
He warned the uncertainty could have a “very significant effect on sales.”
The ruling has set a precedent for how Aboriginal title may intersect with private property rights, raising questions for mortgage professionals, insurers, and investors across BC and potentially the country.
Legal uncertainty around land title can disrupt lending, underwriting, and investment decisions, especially when it comes to fee simple properties in contested areas.
Make sure to get all the latest news to your inbox on Canada’s mortgage and housing markets by signing up for our free daily newsletter here.
