Statement on Cowichan Decision
Background
On August 7, 2025, the B.C. Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling in Cowichan Tribes v. Canada (2025 BCSC 1490), following a trial that began in 2019. The court recognised Aboriginal title to the Cowichan Tribes to certain lands in Richmond, including Crown lands, submerged lands, and parcels containing private property (Title Lands) along with fishing rights on the south arm of the Fraser River.
In its decision, the court found that:
Except for Canada’s fee simple titles and interests in the Vancouver Airport Fuel Delivery Project Lands, Canada and Richmond’s fee simple titles and interests in the Title Lands are defective and invalid.
Canada owes a duty to the Cowichan to negotiate in good faith reconciliation of Canada’s fee simple interests in the Vancouver Airport Fuel Delivery Project Lands with Aboriginal title.
BC owes a duty to Cowichan to negotiate in good faith reconciliation of the Crown granted fee simple interests held by third parties and the soil and freehold interest vested to Richmond with Cowichan’s Aboriginal title. This is the first time in British Columbia that Aboriginal title has been recognized over fee simple lands and the first time that fee simple interests have been declared defective and invalid, creating significant uncertainty about the legal standing of property titles across the province.
Impact & Response
This ruling is a consequential development for British Columbians, as businesses, investors, and property owners rely on secure land titles to operate, grow, and plan for the future. The decision raises important questions about the certainty of fee simple ownership—even in cases where Cowichan did not formally seek invalidation—setting a precedent that could extend beyond Richmond to other parts of the province not covered by treaties.
We support the provincial government’s decision to appeal this ruling and its effort to seek a stay during the appeal process. After consulting with members of the legal community, we believe there are strong grounds for appeal, particularly around the treatment of fee simple titles and the broader implications for private property law.
We have been in active communication with the government, sharing feedback from our members and emphasizing the importance of clarity and stability in the rules that guide land use and investment.
Moving forward, we will continue to monitor developments closely and maintain open dialogue as this process unfolds. In the meantime, we invite members to reach out with any questions or concerns so we can ensure your perspectives are reflected in our ongoing work.