Guerin v. The Queen

Home » Case Law » Guerin v. The Queen
  1. Case Title & Citation
    Guerin v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 335.

  2. Decision Summary (Neutral Overview)
    The Musqueam Indian Band surrendered reserve land to the Crown for leasing as a golf course. The Crown negotiated lease terms less favourable than those disclosed to the Band and kept the true terms hidden.

The Supreme Court held:

  • The Crown owed a fiduciary duty to the Band when dealing with surrendered lands.

  • The Crown breached that duty by acting dishonestly and contrary to the Band’s interests.

  • The Band was entitled to compensation.

  1. Historical & Legal Context
    Guerin is foundational in Canadian Aboriginal law. It established that the Crown’s unilateral control over Indigenous lands carries trust-like obligations, not just political discretion.

  2. Key Legal Principles Identified in the Case

  • The Crown is a fiduciary when managing Indigenous land interests.

  • Breach of fiduciary duty is actionable, with damages.

  • Indigenous land rights are sui generis and not reducible to ordinary property law.

  1. Implications for Haldimand, Loyalist, and Mohawk Questions

  • Guerin supports the view that Haldimand lands—held by the Crown “under His protection” as refuge—impose fiduciary obligations on Canada and Ontario.

  • Allowing unauthorized disposals, roads, and taxation regimes may constitute long-running breaches of that duty.

  1. Points of Interest to Mohawk of Grand River Posterity

  • Guerin helps reframe the conversation from “political grievance” to legal breach: the Crown’s mishandling of Haldimand lands is not just unfortunate; it may be an ongoing fiduciary violation.

  • It supports claims for accounting, compensation, and structural remedies tied to mismanagement of the tract.

  1. Unresolved Questions / Future Research Directions

  • How far can Guerin be extended beyond Indian Act reserves to Crown-purchased refuges like Haldimand?

  • Could courts recognize a specific fiduciary duty to Mohawk Loyalist posterity, distinct from Indian Act band entities?

  1. Sources

  • Guerin v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 335.

  • Aboriginal law commentary on fiduciary duties.

295 words

Sign up to the Newsletter!
Get the latest articles and news delivered to your mailbox.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Categories


About Benjamin Doolittle U.E.

listen to BLOODLINE

“Bloodline” follows the Haldimand Proclamation from its original promise to the present fight to have it honoured. The track moves through Crown grants, broken commitments, and the legal and political road back to enforcement, asking listeners to hear the Proclamation not as a relic of the past, but as a living obligation that still binds the Crown to the Mohawk Nation of Grand River.

Artist: One Way Current
Writer: Benjamin Doolittle UE
Producer: One Way Current
Publisher: Corn Press Publications
Affiliation: Six Miles Deep / Mohawk Nation of Grand River

WHITE PAPER

CROWN PLUS

Crown Plus is an initiative of the Mohawk University, dedicated to restoring truth, lawful continuity, and honour in the interpretation and application of the Haldimand Proclamation of 1784 — the foundational covenant between the Mohawk Nation and the British Crown.

This paper is divided into three parts, each exploring a distinct dimension of the Haldimand covenant: its legal origins, its modern violations, and the path toward lawful restoration. Together, they form the living record of a truth that has been long buried beneath colonial misinterpretation.Crown Plus stands for the principle that the Mohawk Nation is not a subject of the Crown, but a co-sovereign pillar upon which the Canadian state itself rests.

The phrase “Crown Plus” reclaims the language of Canada’s political history — a response to the White Paper (1969) and Red Paper (1970) — and reframes it in the Mohawk context. Where others spoke of “citizens plus,” we assert “Crown Plus”: the indivisible bond of alliance, honour, and hereditary right between the Mohawk and the Crown.

Part I — The Legal Foundations and Historical Continuity

Explores the origins of the Haldimand Proclamation, the Dorchester correction, the Mohawk–Crown alliance since Queen Anne, and the constitutional distinctiveness of the Mohawk Loyalist posterity.

Part II — Modern Violations, Fiduciary Duties, and Institutional Responsibility

Documents the breach of fiduciary duty by Crown agents, the propagation of false land acknowledgements, and the complicity of academic, corporate, and judicial institutions in sustaining unlawful occupation.

Part III — Framework for Restoration, Recommendations, and the Path Forward

Outlines a ten-year restoration plan, proposes the Mohawk Posterity Registry and Royal Commission of Continuity, and reaffirms the spiritual and legal covenant through the Crown Plus Initiative.