Aboriginal title and land ownership is suddenly a hot topic in Canada — and won’t be settled anytime soon

In May 2026, the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by The Wolastoqey Nation to a case involving land parcels held by corporations, including J.D. Irving. An Irving Pulp and Paper Ltd. mill is seen in Saint John, N.B., in 2019. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan Aboriginal title and land ownership is suddenly a hot topic in Canada — and won’t be settled anytime soon Published: July 8, 2026 4.06pm EDT Share article Print article Aboriginal title pertains to the rights Indigenous groups have to land. Fee simple title refers to the most common way individuals in Canada own land. How do these different forms of title interact? The question isn’t new. And, as I recently stated at the annual conference of the Canadian Historical Association in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, a recent Supreme Court of Canada decision doesn’t fix it. The court recently said it would not hear an appeal of the Wolastoqey case — in which a New Brunswick judge said a declaration of Aboriginal title over privately owned lands “would sound the death knell of reconciliation with the interests of non-Aboriginal Canadians.” Many people were watching this case because it differed from the similar Cowichan Case that stated Aboriginal title could co-exist with fee simple title. The Wolastoqey Case limited a declaration of Aboriginal title to Crown land, saying that for fee simple land, at best, a finding (not a declaration) of Aboriginal title could be made — signifying that title existed, and an Indigenous group that once had this is entitled to compensation from the Crown for its loss. As I wrote earlier on the Musqueam Agreements in B.C., the question of Aboriginal title has become a hot topic in Canada, especially since some people are concerned about their private property. Politicizing property rights With many people talking about Aboriginal title, the federal Conservative Party has pledged to protect private property rights. The party even connected Aboriginal title to the K'ómoks Treaty in B.C. The party acknowledges that the document was “already approved through negotiation by K’ómoks First Nation and passed by the British Columbia legislature.” But it also falsely implies the treaty was only negotiated under the federal Liberals, partly by headlining information about it under “Carney’s first treaty” and connecting all of it to the United Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Read more: UNDRIP 15 years on: Genuine truth and reconciliation requires…