Canada: Supreme Court Finds Development Of Jumbo Valley Ski Resort Does Not Impair Ktunaxa Nation's Freedom Of Religion

In Ktunaxa Nation v British Columbia,1 the Supreme Court considered the application of freedom of religion to Indigenous spirituality for the first time. The Ktunaxa Nation claims that the construction of a year-round ski resort in their traditional territory will drive away the Grizzly Bear Spirit, irremediably impairing their religious beliefs and practices. The Supreme Court held that the scope of the right to freedom of religion under the Charter does not protect the presence of the Grizzly Bear Spirit.

The key takeaway points from the decision are as follows

  1. Indigenous sacred beliefs are religious and, in certain circumstances, can receive protection under s. 2(a) of the Charter.
  2. Even if s. 2(a) of the Charter is engaged where an administrative decision affects Indigenous spirituality, a Minister's decision to approve a project may be reasonable if it proportionately balances the s. 2(a) right with relevant statutory objectives.
  3. Section 35 of the Constitution guarantees a process not a particular result.
  4. Aboriginal rights and title claims should be settled by courts through declarations of rights, not through the judicial review of administrative decisions.


In 1991, Glacier Resorts Ltd. ("Glacier") sought permission to build a year-round ski resort in Jumbo Valley in British Columbia's Purcell Mountains.

Glacier and the Government of British Columbia engaged in over 20 years of consultation with the Ktunaxa.2 The Ktunaxa identified that Jumbo Valley held cultural and sacred significance to their Nation. The Ktunaxa proposed accommodation options to mitigate potential impacts of the proposed resort, and gave formal notice that they were interested in negotiating an accommodation and benefits agreement.3 The lengthy consultation process resulted in several changes to the resort proposal to address the Ktunaxa's spiritual concerns.4

In 2009, when it seemed an agreement had been reached, the Ktunaxa adopted a new position.5 The Ktunaxa's new position, which they assert today, is that adequate accommodation is impossible.6 The Ktunaxa assert that the site of the proposed resort, a place which they call Qat'muk, is the home of the Grizzly Bear Spirit. The proposed resort necessarily involves overnight accommodation for guests and staff. The Ktunaxa believe that permanent overnight accommodation in Qat'muk would desecrate the site and drive away the Grizzly Bear Spirit.

The Ktunaxa believe that the departure of the Grizzly Bear Spirit would sever the Ktunaxa's connection to the land. Consequently, "the Ktunaxa would no longer receive spiritual guidance and assistance from Grizzly Bear Spirit. All songs, rituals, and ceremonies associated with Grizzly Bear Spirit would become meaningless."7

In 2012, the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations ("Minister") approved the Master Development Agreement ("MDA") for the proposed resort. In the rationale for his decision, the Minister characterized the Ktunaxa's prima facie claim to an Aboriginal right to the presence of the Grizzly Bear Spirit as "weak" for the purposes of section 35.8 The Minister's characterization was based on the lack of evidence that the Ktunaxa had engaged in particular practices in Qat'muk prior to European contact,9 and that the significance of the Grizzly Bear Spirit was not known to the general Ktunaxa population.10

The Ktunaxa explained that knowledge of the significance of the Grizzly Bear Spirit was held by one elder. The elder had refrained from disclosing the knowledge for five years due to health problems and secrecy concerns.11 The Ktunaxa also explained that certain practices or beliefs, including those relating to the Grizzly Bear Spirit, are held by knowledge keepers in the community, and are not shared with the general population or with outsiders for spiritual reasons.12

Despite the characterization of the Aboriginal right to the presence of the Grizzly Bear Spirit, the Minister engaged in deep consultation with respect to the Ktunaxa's general claim of spiritual connection to the land.13

The Ktunaxa Nation petitioned for a judicial review of the Minister's decision. The Chambers judge dismissed the Ktunaxa's petition. The Ktunaxa Nation appealed the Chambers judge's decision to the British Columbia Court of Appeal, which again dismissed the Ktunaxa's claim. The Ktunaxa appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada arguing that:

  1. Approval of the MDA violated the Ktunaxa Nation's right to freedom of religion, and
  2. The Minister failed to properly consult and accommodate the Ktunaxa in approving the MDA.

On November 2, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the Ktunaxa Nation's case.

Freedom of Religion (Charter, s 2(a))

The Supreme Court noted that "with respect to the s. 2(a) claim, the Ktunaxa stand in the same position as non-Aboriginal litigants."14 To establish infringement of the right to freedom of religion, a claimant must demonstrate that:

  1. He or she sincerely believes in a practice or belief that has a nexus with religion.

    1. the Supreme Court unanimously found that the Ktunaxa sincerely believe in the existence and importance of the Grizzly Bear Spirit and believe that the development of the ski resort will drive away the Grizzly Bear Spirit.
    2. the impugned state conduct interferes, in a manner that is non-trivial or not insubstantial, with his or her ability to act in accordance with that belief or practice.15
    3. on the issue of whether the Minister's decision to approve the ski resort interferes with the Ktunaxa's ability to act in accordance with their beliefs and practices, the Supreme Court split 7 to 2, but agreed (on different grounds) that the Minister's decision should be upheld.

With respect to the second part of the test, the majority of the Court held that the Minister's approval of the ski resort did not interfere with the Ktunaxa Nation's ability to act in accordance with their beliefs and practices associated with the Grizzly Bear Spirit. Freedom of religion protects a citizen's freedom to hold and manifest beliefs. The Court found that freedom of religion does not protect the existence or presence of focal points of worship. The Court held that seeking to protect the presence of a spirit "would extend s. 2(a) beyond its scope and would put deeply held personal beliefs under judicial scrutiny."16

By contrast, the minority held that the scope of s. 2(a) is not limited to the right to hold or manifest a belief through religion, but rather, that s. 2(a) protects the "religious or spiritual essence of an action."17

With this in mind, the minority held that the Ktunaxa's right to freedom of religion was infringed by the Minister's approval of the ski resort in a non-trivial manner because:

"When [religious] significance is taken away by state action, the person can no longer act in accordance with his or her religious beliefs, constituting an infringement of s. 2(a). This is exactly what happened in this case. The Minister's decision to approve the ski resort will render all of the Ktunaxa's religious beliefs related to Grizzly Bear Spirit devoid of any spiritual significance. Accordingly, the Ktunaxa will be unable to perform songs, rituals or ceremonies in recognition of Grizzly Bear Spirit in a manner that has any religious significance for them."18

The minority stated that the approval would also interfere with the Ktunaxa's ability to pass their traditions relating to the Grizzly Bear Spirit on to future generations, an essential and protected aspect of religious freedom.19

The minority emphasized that spiritual connection to land is at the heart of Indigenous religion20 and found that the majority's restrictive reading of s. 2(a) "risks excluding Indigenous religious freedom claims involving land from the scope of s. 2(a) protection."21

However, the minority went on to hold that the infringement of the Ktunaxa's religious freedoms was proportionate. The Minister had reasonably balanced the Ktunaxa's Charter right with the Minister's statutory objective to "administer Crown land and dispose of it in the public interest."22 The minority concluded that the Minister had limited the Ktunaxa's right as little as reasonably possible given his statutory objective.23 Specifically, "[t]he fulfillment of his statutory mandate prevented him from giving the Ktunaxa a veto right over the construction of permanent structures on over fifty square kilometers of public land."24

Given the minority's reasoning, it is likely that we have not seen the last s. 2(a) claim relating to Indigenous spirituality. The Ktunaxa's case also highlights that where the religious freedom of Indigenous groups may be affected by an approval, administrative decision-makers are required to demonstrate that they have proportionately balanced that right with relevant statutory objectives.

Duty to Consult and Accommodate (Constitution Act, 1982, s 35)

The Court concluded that the Minister's conclusion that the Crown had met its duty to consult and accommodate under the Constitution Act, 1982, s. 35 was reasonable. 25 As a result, in the Court's view, the conclusion was entitled to deference.26 The Court determined that the Minister's decision was reasonable because:

  1. The record demonstrated that the Minister had properly understood the nature of the Ktunaxa's spiritual claim and assessed the adverse impact of the proposed resort on that claim27
  2. The Minister had engaged in two decades of negotiation and deep consultation with the Ktunaxa Nation28
  3. The original project proposal had been significantly changed to accommodate the Ktunaxa's concerns about the resort's impact on their spiritual claims.29 Notably the size of the controlled recreational area was reduced by approximately 60%, the total resort area was reduced, and special provisions were made to protect grizzly bear habitat30
  4. The Ktunaxa adopted a new, uncompromising position that accommodation was impossible late in the consultation process when it appeared that all major issues had been resolved31
  5. When the Ktunaxa raised this new position the Minister tried to consult further with the Ktunaxa but was told that further consultation would be fruitless as only rejection of the proposed resort could accommodate the Ktunaxa's spiritual claim,32 and
  6. The Minister provided extensive reasons for his decision to approve the proposed project which included a detailed account of the consultation and accommodation that had occurred.

The Court confirmed that section 35 does not guarantee a particular result or give unsatisfied claimants a veto over state action.33 When there has been adequate consultation and accommodation, development may proceed without the consent of affected Indigenous peoples, particularly where claims are asserted and unproven.34

The Court emphasized that consultation is a "process of give and take"35 and a "two-way street."36 An Indigenous group involved in consultation is "called on to facilitate the process of consultation and accommodation by setting out its claims clearly and as early as possible."37 In its reasons, the Court focused on the persistent attempts of the Minister to engage in consultation and accommodation with the Ktunaxa over a 20 year period, and highlighted the fact that the Ktunaxa adopted a new "uncompromising" and "absolute" position late in the process.

It remains to be seen if or how the Supreme Court's reasoning might change with the application of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ("UNDRIP") and, in particular, the principle of Free Prior and Informed Consent ("FPIC") to Indigenous rights in Canada. The Supreme Court notably did not reference UNDRIP or FPIC in its reasons. This is likely attributable to the fact that the Ktunaxa's claim was filed before UNDRIP was adopted by the United Nations or endorsed by the federal government.

Judicial Review of Consultation is Not the Forum for Resolving Aboriginal Rights Claims

The Supreme Court interpreted the Ktunaxa's claim of inadequate consultation as a petition for a declaration of an Aboriginal right to a sacred site and associated spiritual practices "in the guise of a judicial review of an administrative decision."38 The Court emphasized that a declaration of Aboriginal right:

"cannot be made by a Court sitting in judicial review of an administrative decision. In judicial proceedings, such a declaration can only be made after a trial of the issue and with the benefit of pleadings, discovery, evidence, and submissions. Aboriginal rights must be proven by tested evidence; they cannot be established as an incident of administrative law proceedings that centre on the adequacy of consultation and accommodation."39

The Court's reasoning clarifies that Aboriginal rights cannot be indirectly asserted. There is a clear distinction between the process of settling Indigenous rights claims and the duty to consult which is applied to ensure that the impact on asserted rights is fairly considered pending the resolution of claims.

Looking Forward

But for certain facts including the length and extent of consultation activities and the scope and timing of the Ktunaxa's new claim, the majority of the Court could have found that the Ktunaxa's freedom of religion had been infringed by the Minister's approval of the resort. In other words, the Court's decision will likely not preclude future freedom of religion claims based on Indigenous spiritual practices. Further, it remains to be seen how the proportionality test will be applied in circumstances where an infringement of s. 2(a) of the Charter is found to exist.

It also bears noting that Glacier will likely continue to face difficulty and opposition in developing the ski resort. The proposed resort has faced backlash from the local community including Indigenous and non-Indigenous residents, environmental groups, and outdoor industry companies such as Patagonia. The debate has even been the focus of a documentary film, "Jumbo Wild".40

Glacier will also face future regulatory and judicial obstacles. On June 18, 2015, the British Columbia Minister of Environment found that the Environmental Assessment Certificate ("EAC") for the proposed report had expired in October 2014.41 The EAC is necessary for Glacier to continue any development of the proposed resort. Glacier has announced its intention to seek a judicial review of the Minister of Environment's decision.42


1 Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations), 2017 SCC 54 [Ktunaxa].

2 Ktunaxa at para 4.

3 Ktunaxa at para 26 and 30.

4 Ktunaxa at para 33.

5 Ktunaxa at para 6.

6 Ktunaxa at para 36.

7 Ktunaxa at para 117.

8 Ktunaxa at para 99 and 141.

9 Ktunaxa at para 100.

10 Ktunaxa at para 99.

11 Ktunaxa at para 36.

12 Ktunaxa at para 95.

13 Ktunaxa at para 105.

14 Ktunaxa at para 58.

15 Ktunaxa at para 8, citing R v Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 SCR 295, at p. 336.

16 Ktunaxa at para 70-71.

17 Ktunaxa at para 130.

18 Ktunaxa at para 118.

19 Ktunaxa at para 125.

20 Ktunaxa at para 127.

21 Ktunaxa at para 131.

22 Ktunaxa at para 119, 136 and 145.

23 Ktunaxa at para 120.

24 Ktunaxa at para 154.

25 Ktunaxa at para 77.

26 Ktunaxa at para 77.

27 Ktunaxa at para 93.

28 Ktunaxa at para 87.

29 Ktunaxa at para 87.

30 Ktunaxa at para 32-33.

31 Ktunaxa at para 87.

32 Ktunaxa at para 87.

33 Ktunaxa at para 79 and 83.

34 Ktunaxa at para 80.

35 Ktunaxa at para 114.

36 Ktunaxa at para 80.

37 Ktunaxa at para 79.

38 Ktunaxa at para 84.

39 Ktunaxa at para 84.

40 Jumbo Wild. (2017). [DVD] Canada: Sweetgrass Productions.

41 Ministry of Environment, "Reasons for Minister's Determination: Jumbo Glacier Resort Project" (June 18, 2015), online: (

42 Pheidias Project Management Corporation, "Jumbo Glacier Resort Project", Letter to M. Read, CAO of Jumbo Glacier Mountain Resort Municipality (July 20, 2015), online: (

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.

Julie Abouchar
Charles Birchall
In association with
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
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 you may opt out by clicking here

    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.

    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.


    From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

    *** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


    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.

    By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions