Anishinaabe Law at the Margins: Treaty Law in Northern Ontario, Canada, as Colonial Expansion

In 1850, 17 years before the Dominion of Canada was created, colonial officers in representation of Her Majesty the Queen, concluded Treaty Numbers 60 and 61 with the Anishinaabe Nation of Northern Ontario. The Robinson Treaties - so named after William Benjamin Robinson, a government official - include land cessions made by the Anishinaabe communities in return for ongoing financial support and protection of hunting rights. The land areas included in the treaty are vast territories that surround two of Canada's great lakes: Lake Superior and Lake Huron. These lands were important for colonial expansion as settlements began to move west across North America. The treaties promised increased annual annuity payments "if and when" the treaty territory produced profits that enabled "the Government of this Province, without incurring loss, to increase the annuity hereby secured to them." This amount has not been increased in 150 years. This article reviews Restoule v. Canada, a recent Ontario decision brought by Anishinaabe Treaty beneficiaries who seek to affirm these treaty rights. A reading of the Robinson Treaties that implements the original treaty promise and increases annuity payments would be a hopeful outcome of the Restoule v. Canada decision for it would be the implementation of reconciliation. In addition, the Restoule decision has important insights to offer about how Indigenous law can guide modern‐day treaty interpretation just as it guided the adoption of the treaty in 1850. The Robinson Treaties are important for the implementation of treaty promises through Indigenous law and an opportunity to develop a Canada in which Indigenous peoples are true partners in the development and management of natural resources

A Property Law Reader: Cases, Questions, and Commentary, 5th ed., Preface and Table of Contents

Nobody has been more influential over the past generation in the teaching of property law in Canada than Bruce Ziff. His Principles of Property Law is the foundational textbook on the subject. A Property Law Reader: Cases, Questions, and Commentary, which he first published as a sole author in 2004, has become, over three subsequent editions, the most widely used teaching material for property law in the country. Bruce retired from teaching property law in 2019. His retirement left major holes not only at the University of Alberta, where he taught for decades, but also throughout Canada in terms of guiding students, mentoring professors, and developing teaching materials and other resources for property law. Bruce had brought in Jeremy de Beer, Douglas Harris, and Margaret McCallum to collaborate with him on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th editions of A Property Law Reader, but with his retirement, and also with Margaret’s, after years at the University of New Brunswick, the 5th edition is the product of a new scholarly collaboration with Tenille Brown and Patricia Farnese joining Jeremy and Doug. Although Bruce has stepped aside entirely from this 5th edition, his intellectual contributions remain profound. Much of the material within chapters has been updated or replaced, but the 5th edition retains the structure and organization that Bruce initially conceived. It also retains many of Margaret’s contributions to the selection of material and the commentary. The preface of the 4th edition began with this statement: “Property law—that body of rules which describes and defines relationships between people with respect to things—involves many choices.” The opening paragraphs continued by emphasizing that these choices, explicit or implicit, involve important decisions about the allocation of resources, and further, that we needed to interrogate the justifications for these decisions. The materials in the 4th edition, and in this 5th edition, return repeatedly to the justifications for particular rules and to ask whether they remain convincing. Indeed, the collection of materials was designed to enable an investigation of property law rules, and of the justifications for them

A Right Not to Be Mapped? Augmented Reality, Real Property, and Zoning

The digital mapping applications underlying augmented reality have strong public benefits but can also have unappreciated effects on real property. In recent litigation on Pokémon Go, an enhanced digital mapping application in which players participate in a digital scavenger hunt by visiting real world locations, homeowners alleged that the augmented reality application harmed their residential properties by increasing the number of people in their residential areas. However, neither the existing laws on intellectual property nor those for real property are designed to address these types of harms. On the one hand, real property torts, such as nuisance and trespass, on which the homeowners relied, are ill-suited to address harms from a digital application as they are based on a right to exclude and consent. On the other hand, intellectual property laws have not focused on harms that could result from the intersection of intellectual property rights and real property. If it were to be framed anew, the basis of the homeowners’ claims would be most analogous to asserting “a right not to be mapped.” However, there is not yet a “right not to be mapped” in law, and there are compelling reasons for the law not to create one. We recommend three alternative mechanisms to regulate the relationship between augmented reality and real property. We recommend the application of zoning principles as a legal mechanism designed for location-sensitive regulation, which can balance the concerns of individual real property owners, as well as the larger context of community and city interests, and be adapted to innovative technologies such as augmented reality. Additionally, we suggest that catalogues of augmented reality applications be created to support zoning decisions and to provide public notice. We also consider the possibility of licensing schemes with micropayments for real properties affected by augmented reality

A Property Law Reader: Cases, Questions, and Commentary, 5th ed., Preface and Table of Contents

Nobody has been more influential over the past generation in the teaching of property law in Canada than Bruce Ziff. His Principles of Property Law is the foundational textbook on the subject. A Property Law Reader: Cases, Questions, and Commentary, which he first published as a sole author in 2004, has become, over three subsequent editions, the most widely used teaching material for property law in the country. Bruce retired from teaching property law in 2019. His retirement left major holes not only at the University of Alberta, where he taught for decades, but also throughout Canada in terms of guiding students, mentoring professors, and developing teaching materials and other resources for property law. Bruce had brought in Jeremy de Beer, Douglas Harris, and Margaret McCallum to collaborate with him on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th editions of A Property Law Reader, but with his retirement, and also with Margaret’s, after years at the University of New Brunswick, the 5th edition is the product of a new scholarly collaboration with Tenille Brown and Patricia Farnese joining Jeremy and Doug. Although Bruce has stepped aside entirely from this 5th edition, his intellectual contributions remain profound. Much of the material within chapters has been updated or replaced, but the 5th edition retains the structure and organization that Bruce initially conceived. It also retains many of Margaret’s contributions to the selection of material and the commentary. The preface of the 4th edition began with this statement: “Property law—that body of rules which describes and defines relationships between people with respect to things—involves many choices.” The opening paragraphs continued by emphasizing that these choices, explicit or implicit, involve important decisions about the allocation of resources, and further, that we needed to interrogate the justifications for these decisions. The materials in the 4th edition, and in this 5th edition, return repeatedly to the justifications for particular rules and to ask whether they remain convincing. Indeed, the collection of materials was designed to enable an investigation of property law rules, and of the justifications for them