Search results
v. Van der Peet. This page contains a form to search the Supreme Court of Canada case information database. You can search by the SCC 5-digit case number, by name or word in the style of cause, or by file number from the appeal court.
Access all information related to judgment R. v. Van der Peet, 1996 CanLII 216 (SCC), [1996] 2 SCR 507 on CanLII.
In R. v. Van der Peet, a majority of the Supreme Court of Canada has substantially modified the test for the existence of Aboriginal rights unanimously adopted six years earlier in R. v. Sparrow.
Europeans.11 As Ms. Van der Peet “failed to demonstrate that the exchange of fish for money or other goods was an integral part of the distinctive Sto:lo society which existed prior to contact,”12 the Supreme Court held that she had not proven her Aboriginal right, and so was guilty as charged.
The trial judge found Van der Peet guilty of violating the fishing regulations, and Van der Peet appealed. On appeal, the judge recognized an aboriginal right to sell fish and remanded for a new trial.
19 wrz 2003 · 2003-09-19. File number: 28533. Other citations: 68 OR (3d) 255 — 230 DLR (4th) 1 — 308 NR 201 — 125 ACWS (3d) 1 — 177 OAC 201 — 177 CCC (3d) 193 — 5 CELR (3d) 1 — 110 CRR (2d) 92 — [2003] 4 CNLR 321 — 58 WCB (2d) 348 — JE 2003-1751 — [2003] SCJ No 43 (QL) — [2003] ACS no 43. Citation:
According to the Court, as stipulated in the Van der Peet case, in order for an Indigenous practice to receive constitutional protection, it must pass a two-stage test referred to as the Integral to a Distinctive Culture Test, or the Van der Peet Test.
