J.P. Antonacci
BRANT NEWS
Several Six Nations activists face a hefty legal bill following a court judgement against them in a lawsuit filed by the City of Brantford over a 2008 injunction that prevented land claims protesters from halting work at development sites.
In a court order published late last month, Ontario Superior Court Justice Harrison S. Arrell ruled that protesters must pay the city $350,000 in court costs incurred during a 22-day hearing concerning Brantford’s injunction request.
Among those ordered to pay in Arrell’s decision is the Haudenosaunee Development Institute. Well-known land claims activists Floyd and Ruby Montour were also ordered to pay.
Arrell ruled that Brantford was “completely and totally successful” in arguing that two bylaws passed by city council were necessary to prevent systematic blockades of commercial and residential developments.
The city filed a legal bill of $887,000, which was reduced after Arrell deemed the city’s accounting of billable hours and hourly rates for legal counsel “somewhat excessive.” The judge also removed costs incurred during court-ordered consultation.
Brantford Mayor Chris Friel said the ruling is significant for the city.
“Now we have to make a decision as a council in regard to how we proceed,” Friel said.
Council will receive legal advice during an in-camera meeting on Monday regarding what approach the city should take to recover the money owed. Friel did not rule out an appeal challenging the judge’s reduction of the city’s legal costs.
Arrell ruled that $350,000 was a “fair and reasonable amount” to be paid to the city by the Six Nations respondents. He rejected the respondents’ argument that they were contesting an issue of public importance and therefore should not have to pay legal costs in defeat.
In his judgement, Arrell wrote that the primary motive behind the blockades “was to impose on private citizens (the protestors’) wishes in relation to private land in Brantford.”
Arrell said the case attracted “certain notoriety,” but did not serve to address the issue of land claims.
“Rather, the alleged issues of public importance were raised as attempts to justify what this court ultimately found to be illegal activities,” Arrell wrote.
Coun. Richard Carpenter, a member of city council when Brantford launched its injunction action in 2008, called the ruling a vindication of the city’s approach to protests.
“The taxpayers have paid $2 million for the injunction, which is working – that’s why you see development today,” Carpenter said.
Carpenter cautioned against seeing the issue through the lens of the city’s official relationship with Six Nations.
“The protests didn’t represent Six Nations, they represented the views of the protesters,” he said. “It’s not us against them.”
Friel advocates a more conciliatory approach to land claims issues.
“(The injunction) is a tool that’s available, but it is this council’s position that we should be finding solutions for the long-term through negotiations,” the mayor said.
The respondents have 30 days from the ruling date – Feb. 28 – to pay the city costs, pending an appeal.
Lawyer Jessica Orkin, who represented the HDI during the injunction hearing, declined to comment on the decision when reached at her Toronto office. The Montours and HDI staff were also unavailable for comment.
The Six Nations Confederacy and its HDI have been using the 1701 Nanfan Treaty to make deals in southwestern Ontario to get millions of dollars from green energy companies like NextEra, Capital Power, etc. If the green energy companies are paying, the HDI should easily be able to pay its share of the court costs.
I’m not sure about Ruby and Floyd Montour or other defendants.
According to a story in the Turtle Island News, Hazel Hill, the interim director of the HDI said “we could hold a toll road on one of our roadways, like Plank Road (Highway 6) or another one”. I guess that’s her idea for raising money to pay for the court costs.
Well, she had better get busy organizing toll booths because they only have 30 days to raise the money or I guess mayor Friel will have go the reserve, pass around a hat and collect the money himself. lol
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
12 
4
Here are some questions.
What will happen if the HDI and others don’t pay the #350,000 in court costs?
If they do pay the court costs, where will the money come from?
And think about this.
If the green energy companies like NextEra, Capital Power, etc. are paying the Six Nations Confederacy and its HDI millions of dollars, that is a cost of doing business the green energy companies will pass to consumers. If the HDI uses $350,000 of that money to cover the court costs for itself and the Montours and others who have helped the HDI, the electricity consumers/ratepayers will pay.
The consumer/taxpayer/ratepayer always pays.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
1
Now to collect it? mmmmmmmmmm
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
2
The City of Brantford obtained an injunction against anyone, including Six Nations people, stalling, stopping or interfering with construction and development on third-party land in Brantford.
Justice Arrell just issued an order for the HDI and Six Nations activists to pay $350,000 in court costs.
Other Ontario Superior Court Justices have also issued injunctions against anyone, including Six Nations people, stalling, stopping or interfering with construction and development on third-party land at other locations along the Grand River outside of the reserve.
The land Brantford wants to develop in town is third-party land. The land Brantford would like to get from Brant County in boundary talks is third-party land.
The Ontario government has said it stands buy its land titles system so the third parties who own land in Brantford and Brant County have valid deeds, titles and claims to their land.
The Canadian federal government (the big Crown) and the Ontario government (the little Crown) have both said they will not expropriate any third-party land to give to the Six Nations in settlement of any Six Nations claim so the Six Nations can only get money to settle its claims.
The municipalities like Brantford and Brant County are not defendants in the Six Nations court case for claims so the municipalities are not obliged to pay, to share land, to give up land or to give up anything else to the Six Nations.
The Six Nations claims are against the Canadian federal government and the Ontario government and it is up to the Canadian federal government (the big Crown), not the municipalities, to pay the money to settle the Six Nations claims.
So can someone please tell me why Six Nations chief Bill Montour and other Six Nations people keep saying Brantford and Brant County have to talk to the Six Nations and include the Six Nations in discussions about development on third-party land outside of the reserve and be included in boundary discussions that include third-party land the Six Nations will not get?
And, when the Six Nations claims are about money it should get from the Canadian federal government (the big Crown), not municipalities, can someone please explain why Brandford and Brant County think they must include the Six Nations in boundary discussions and about development on third-party land the Six Nations will not get outside of the reserve.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
10 
1
The article talks about “a lawsuit filed by the City of Brantford over a 2008 injunction that prevented land claims protesters from halting work at development sites”.
Six Nations people keep talking about “unceded” land and land claims but the Six Nations claims aren’t about land. The claims are about money.
As I have pointed out before, the Five (later Six) Nations Iroquois surrendered their beaver hunting ground, which was a huge tract of land including land in what is now the U.S.A. and land in what is now southwestern Ontario, including land along the Grand River, to the British Crown in 1701 according to the Nanfan Treaty and “for ever quit claim” to that land.
Later, Quebec Governor Haldimand arranged to pay the Ojibwa Mississauga Indians for a huge tract of land, including land along the Grand River. The Mississauga Indians agreed and they did “grant, bargain, sell, alien, release, and confirm” that land to the British Crown “forever” on May 22, 1784. It then definitely became the Crown’s land.
Governor Haldimand then issued an announcement about 6 months later on October 25, 1784 in which he invited Mohawks and others of the Six Nations from New York to enter, occupy use a strip of the Crown’s land along the Grand River. That announcement was not a treaty or a deed for land from the Crown to the Six Nations. It was a license from the Governor for Six Nations people to occupy and use the Crown’s land along the Grand River and Crown courts have said so.
Later, in 1793, Mohawk leader Joseph Brant and the chiefs from Six Nations of the Grand River would not accept the Simcoe Patent, a deed to land along the Grand River so the land remained the Crown’s land.
Given that history, the Six Nations should not be able to claim land that belonged to the Crown and the six Nations could not cede land that belonged to the Crown. The Six Nations could only give up (surrender) their use of the Crown’s land.
Furthermore, the Canadian federal government (the big Crown) is responsible for settling any valid Six Nations claims. The Ontario government (the little Crown) has said it stands by its land titles system and the Canadian federal government (the big Crown) and the Ontario government (the little Crown) have both said they will not expropriate any third-party land land to give to the Six Nations in settlement of any Six Nations claim.
If the Six Nations cannot claim land that belonged to the Crown and if the Crown will not expropriate third-party land to give to the Six Nations to settle any valid Six Nations claim, the Six Nations will only be able to get money.
Again, the Six Nations claims are about money, not land. They are not land claims so people, governments, the Six Nations and the media should stop calling them land claims.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
1
Justice Arrell ordered Six Nations activists and the HDI to pay $350,000 in court cost so Justice Arrell must have had some reason to believe they can come up with the money.
That then raises some questions.
Where do the Six Nations Confederacy and its HDI get their money from?
Are they getting money from green energy companies like NextEra and Capital Power and from other developers?
If green energy companies like NextEra, Capital Power and other developers are paying the Six Nations Confederacy and its HDI so the companies can build wind turbines, solar farms, houses, etc. on land along the Grand River outside of the reserve, aren’t those companies supporting the very people who protest and stall and interfere with development?
Aren’t those companies then supporting the Six Nations Confederacy and its HDI who are at odds with the Six Nations elected band council? Doesn’t that support simply continue the rift between the Six Nations Confederacy and the elected band council making it more difficult for the Canadian federal government to settle Six Nations claims?
And think about his.
If green energy companies like NextEra, Capital Power and other developers are paying the Six Nations Confederacy and its HDI so the companies can build wind turbines, solar farms, houses, etc. on land along the Grand River outside of the reserve, that will be a cost of doing business, which the companies will pass on to consumers and electricity ratepayers. If the HDI uses some of that money from those companies to pay the $350,000 in court costs, effectively consumers and ratepayers will be paying the costs.
Shouldn’t consumers and electricity ratepayers in this region of southwestern Ontario be upset about that?
And what are the Six Nations Confederacy and its HDI doing with the money? How are they using it to influence people and who has their fingers in the pie?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
1
— Good points Gary. Maybe HDI does have the money, and if they are operating off the reserve assets could be liened on or seized by the sherriff. Do any of the defendants own vehicles with Ontario plates?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
4 
0
Obviously, the Six Nations Confederacy and its HDI had the money pay a law firm for the extensive Amicus Report (Factum) they presented to Justice Arrell in the Brantford injunction case and the Six Nations Confederacy and its HDI have the money to hire lawyers like Aaron Detlor and Jessica Orkin to spend lots of time defending the HDI and Six Nations activists.
So, again where are the Six Nations Condeferacy and its HDI getting all of that money? What are they doing with it? Who are they influencing with it and how many people, on and off the reserve, have their fingers in that pie?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Here is a question someone asked.
If the HDI and other defendants in the court case do not pay the $350,000, can the City of Brantford sue to have liens put on bank accounts, private property, wages, etc.?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0