Yukon government asks court to dismiss lawsuit launched by Trondëk Hwëchin First Nation

The Yukon government denies it breached its duty to consult with a First Nation that launched a lawsuit against it earlier this year, according to a statement of defence filed in the Supreme Court of Yukon last week. The Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in First Nation, based in Dawson City about a six-and-a-half hour’s drive north of Whitehorse, launched the legal action against the government on Jan. 28. The lawsuit claims the government didn’t consult with it before making temporary regulatory amendments to the territory’s mining regulations last year to ease a backlog of mining authorizations. The suit accuses the government of failing or refusing to provide adequate resources and staffing to address a “foreseeable surge” of mining application renewals, enabling it to acquire “significant savings.” It also alleges the government “relaxed” regulatory mining requirements, including those under the territory’s Waters Act and Quartz Mining Act, which allowed projects needing new authorizations to continue. The suit claims that permitted projects to proceed “without strict compliance” and with “expired plans.” Those amendments, it claims, violated its Final Agreement. It argues that the government breached its duty to consult and accommodate the First Nation by failing to give it “reasonable advance notice” ahead of the amendments, among other things. The lawsuit asks for a handful of declarations, including that the government breached its fiduciary duty to the First Nation. It also asks for the government to pay the First Nation damages. But the statement of defence disputes much of the First Nation’s allegations. It argues its actions didn’t violate the First Nation’s Final Agreement, nor did it breach any constitutional duties. According to the statement of defence, the government authorized developments and permit renewals “having full regards to impacts on the (First Nation’s) rights and interests,” as well as the requirements of its Final Agreement. It also claims it had adequate staffing and resources “at all times,” while also denying that it saved money by implementing the regulatory amendments. It asserts that the amendments were adopted to address matters of concern for the entire territory. It denies that the amendments triggered its duty to consult with the First Nation. It further contends that the government met its duty to consult, it fulfilled the honor of the Crown and it met its obligations under the Final Agreement. It argues that even if it did infringe on the First Nation’s rights, it’s justified as “being in the pursuit of compelling and substantial public objectives.” The filing asks for the lawsuit to be thrown out. None of the lawsuit’s allegations have been tested in court. The First Nation filed a separate lawsuit against the government in December. That action accuses the territory of doing little to address longstanding concerns about inactive mineral claims, something it alleges is harming its settlement land. Continue Reading