Opaskwayak Cree Nation v. Canada

canada, canadian, case law, court opinion, canlii, fct, 2026fc1110, 2026 fc 1110 (canlii), 2026, fc, 1110, (canlii), t-299-92, 2026, indigenous peoples, crown fiduciary duty, expropriation of reserve, whether expropriation of reserve triggered sui generis fiduciary duty, discretionary decision affecting indigenous interest in land, indian act, s. 35 process considered, fiduciary duty accepted by canada, action allowed in part, constitution, treaty rights and context, traditional territory impacts, whether fairness assessment must account for impacts beyond reserve, treaty 5 promise and hunting and fishing rights, constitution act, 1930 context considered, scope of duty not restricted to trigger, duty extended to off, reserve impacts, claim partly allowed, indigenous peoples, breach of fiduciary duty, improvident bargain, whether approval of 1962 letter of intent breached duty, failure to ensure mitigation or compensation for dam impacts, “package deal” not obtained, agreement mere real estate transaction, informed consent insufficient to cure improvidence, breach found, action allowed in part, indigenous peoples, equitable compensation, lost opportunity, what equitable compensation flows from breach of fiduciary duty, lost opportunity defined as 1962 negotiation of mitigation or compensation agreement for limited period, retrospective assessment of damages rejected, present value assessed by compounded interest approach, defendant condemned to pay equitable compensation, action allowed in part