Canada: Jurisdiction And Justiciability: Hupacasath First Nation v. Canada Shows Few Decisions Shielded From Judicial Authority

Last Updated: March 24 2015
Article by Yannick Landry

In the January 9, 2015 noteworthy decision Hupacasath First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General)1, the Federal Court of Appeal provided clarity on two important issues: firstly, the federal courts' jurisdiction to review the exercise of prerogative powers; and secondly, the justiciability of the exercise of said powers – or the limits over which a court can exercise its judicial authority upon legal issues.

This bulletin outlines the ruling and reviews the scope of judicial authority granted by Parliament to the Federal Courts.

Case Background

Canada signed a reciprocal foreign investment agreement with the People's Republic of China, known as the Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the People's Republic of China for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (the "Agreement") in September 2012. The Agreement embodies inter alia a minimum standard of treatment to foreign investors by providing a guarantee against discriminatory treatment and also provides a protection from expropriation without compensation.

The Appellant, Hupacasath First Nation, ("Hupacasath"), is a band under the Indian Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-5 that has 285 members living on two reserves covering roughly 56 acres of land on Vancouver Island, British Columbia. However, it asserts Aboriginal rights, including self-government rights, and title over roughly 573,000 acres of land on Vancouver Island.

Before the Federal Court2, Hupacasath alleged that the Agreement might affect Aboriginal rights and interests it has asserted over lands in British Columbia and therefore, the Minister of Foreign Affairs had an obligation to consult Hupacasath prior to entering into the Agreement.

Justice Crampton dismissed the application and found that the Agreement was unlikely to cause harm to Hupacasath, concluding that Hupacasath's asserted rights and interests were "non-appreciable" and "speculative".

Hupacasath appealed the ruling to the Federal Court of Appeal.

As a preliminary issue, the Court of Appeal had to address the issue of whether the federal courts had jurisdiction over decisions by the Government of Canada to enter into international agreements and treaties falling under the Crown's prerogative power, in light of the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Black v. Canada (Prime Minister)3 ("Black"). The Attorney General further argued that the exercise of a Crown prerogative power is not justiciable and therefore, Hupacasath's case should not be heard at all.

The Court of Appeal, under Justice Stratas' pen, thought otherwise. The Federal Courts system was granted jurisdiction to review the exercise of Crown prerogative powers. These powers, except in rare circumstances, are also justiciable.

Scope of Judicial Authority Granted by Parliament to Federal Courts

a) The Issue of Jurisdiction

The Court restated that the Crown's prerogative is the "residue of discretionary or arbitrary authority, which at any given time is legally left in the hands of the Crown." The conduct of foreign affairs is an area where the Crown holds such prerogative powers.

Courts have judicially reviewed prerogative powers in the past. The question that arises in this case is whether the Federal Courts have been granted such jurisdiction by Parliament. In Black, the only appellate authority on this question in Canada, the Ontario Court of Appeal decided the Federal Courts do not have the power under the Federal Courts Act ("Act") to review exercises of pure Crown prerogative. Only Superior Courts, by virtue of their inherent jurisdiction, would be authorized to review such decisions.

The coming into force provision of the Agreement is found at section 35. Under the Agreement, the Governor in Council had to pass an order in council to authorize the Minister of Foreign Affairs to take the necessary actions to have the Agreement come into effect. Then, the Agreement comes into effect when the Minister signs an instrument of ratification and delivers it to the People's Republic of China.

According to the Ontario Court of Appeal's literal interpretation of the Act, only decisions made by the Crown or under an order made under the Crown's prerogative would fall within the purview of the Federal Courts. Pure exercise of prerogative power would have to be reviewed in the provincial superior courts.

The Federal Court of Appeal rejected the narrow and literal interpretation of subsection 2(1) adopted by the Ontario Court of Appeal in Black. According to the strong reasons provided by Justice Stratas, the Federal Courts can review exercises of jurisdiction or power rooted solely in the Federal Crown prerogative. Using the contextual and purposive analysis of the provision, the Federal Court of Appeal had to distinguish this decision, which it did elegantly:

[54] An interpretation that the Federal Court has the power to review federal exercises of pure prerogative power is consistent with the Parliament's aim to have the Federal Courts review all federal administrative decisions. The contrary interpretation would carve out from the Federal Courts a wide swath of administrative decisions that stem from the federal prerogative, some of which can have large national impact: for a list of the federal prerogative powers, see Peter W. Hogg, Q.C., et al., Liability of the Crown, supra at pages 23-24 and S. Payne, "The Royal Prerogative" in M. Sunkin and S. Payne, eds., The Nature of the Crown: A Legal and Political Analysis (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999).

[56] The contrary interpretation – an interpretation that hives off exercises of federal prerogative power from exercises of powers under orders made by or under the prerogative power – is a technical distinction that serves only to trap the unwary and obstruct access to justice. In TeleZone, supra, a case postdating Black, the Supreme Court underscored (at paragraphs 18-19 and 32) the need to interpret these provisions with a view to avoiding these concerns.

[57] In the case at bar, these concerns are very much in play. If the contrary interpretation is adopted, the Governor in Council's making of the order in this case authorizing the Minister to issue the instrument of ratification – a pure exercise of prerogative power – would have to be reviewed in the provincial superior courts. But the Minister's issuance of the instrument of ratification in this case – an exercise of power "by or under an order made under the prerogative" under subsection 2(1) of the Federal Courts Act – would have to be reviewed under this Court's exclusive jurisdiction under subsection 18 (1) of the Federal Courts Act. There would have to be two separate proceedings in two separate courts, with every potential for unnecessary expense, delay, confusion and inconsistency.

b) The Issue of Justiciability

The Attorney General, relying on previous Supreme Court of Canada's decisions4, also argued that the exercise of pure federal Crown prerogative are only reviewable by the courts when Charter rights are in issue.

Although Justice Stratas recognized that some executive decisions are so political, cultural, social or historical that they are not amenable to the judicial process, he insisted that this category of decisions is "very small".

Despite the fact that the vast majority of decisions are within the purview of legal analysis, Justice Stratas acknowledged that the decision-maker benefits from a large margin of appreciation:

[67] These cases show that the category of non-justiciable cases is very small. Even in judicial reviews of subordinate legislation motivated by economic considerations and other difficult public interest concerns, courts will still assess the acceptability and defensibility of government decision-making, often granting the decision-maker a very large margin of appreciation. For that reason, it is often said that in such cases an applicant must establish an "egregious" case.

However, Justice Stratas specified that decisions such as the one at issue are still justiciable.

In the case at bar, Hupacasath is challenging the Canadian government's decision to bring the Agreement into effect despite its alleged legal rights of being consulted in advance. Therefore, Justice Stratas concluded the question at issue in this case was whether or not legal rights exist, a question that falls squarely within the court's jurisdiction. For said reason, he found that the Attorney General's argument on non-justiciability was without merit.

Most Government Decisions Reviewable by Courts

The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the ground that Hupacasath did not meet the legal test to trigger a duty to consult and concluded that the reasoning of the Federal Court judge deserves deference. Hupacasath's evidence fell short and was deemed speculative. The court noted that in the event that any adverse impacts materialize on Hupacasath's rights in the future, Hupacasath will be able to seek protection from the courts by way of injunctive relief or other extraordinary reliefs. Hupacasath's case was deemed premature.

What litigants people and organizations affected by government decisions, albeit from the Executive Branch, should take away from this decision is that the vast majority of the decisions taken by the government are reviewable by the courts.


1. 2015 FCA 4.

2. 2013 FC 900.

3. [2001], 54 O.R. (3d) 215.

4. See Operation Dismantle Inc. v. Canada [1985] 1 S.C.R. 441 and Canada (Prime Minister) v. Khadr, [2010] SCC 3.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.