In Mikisew Cree First Nation v Canada, 2018 SCC 40 a majority of the Justices on the Court agreed that the duty to consult does not arise in the legislative process. Running up against the limit of consultation the Justices turned to consider whether the doctrine of justified infringement, which has included consultation as a substantive consideration from its inception and as a preliminary procedural step since Tsilhqot'in Nation v British Columbia, 2014 SCC 44, provided sufficient and

more »

... e protection to Aboriginal and Treaty rights in circumstances where the duty to consult did not arise. The Justices were split five to four signaling that there is doctrinal reform or entrenchment on the horizon.