[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-296602-105":59,"doc-detail-296602-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":124,"head_meta":126,"extra_data":128,"updated_unix":130},105,"en","reply-submissions-of-the-saugeen-ojibway-nation-reply-submissions-part-1","REPLY SUBMISSIONS OF THE SAUGEEN OJIBWAY NATION - Reply Submissions - Part 1","","Reply submissions filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice concerning matters between the Chippewas of Nawash Unceded First Nation and Saugeen First Nation as plaintiffs, and the Attorney General of Canada and related defendants. The document sets out arguments addressing crown immunity, including relevant statutory provisions and positions of the Saugeen Ojibway Nation, and responds to Ontario’s submissions. It further addresses limitations and laches with facts, systemic obstacles, limitation law, international commitments, discoverability, and both real property limitation and laches branches, then turns to oral history evidence and archaeology reliability and interpretation.",{"@graph":69,"@context":123},[70,84,106],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/reply-submissions-of-the-saugeen-ojibway-nation-reply-submissions-part-1/296602/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/reply-submissions-of-the-saugeen-ojibway-nation-reply-submissions-part-1/296602.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Bulrr","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-20","2026-09-18",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":105},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",11,{"@type":107,"mainEntity":108},"FAQPage",[109,115,119],{"name":110,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":112},"What topics are covered in the reply submissions?","Question",{"text":113,"@type":114},"The submissions address crown immunity, limitations and laches, oral history evidence, and archaeology, including challenges to rigidity and reliability arguments.","Answer",{"name":116,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":117},"How does the document treat limitations and laches?",{"text":118,"@type":114},"It organizes the analysis into overview, relevant facts, systemic obstacles to asserting rights, the Nation’s assertion of rights, the positions of Canada, limitations law and its interpretation, and branches such as discoverability, acquiescence, and prejudice.",{"name":120,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":121},"What does the document say about oral history evidence?",{"text":122,"@type":114},"It argues that Canada’s approach is too rigid and addresses Canada’s and Ontario’s positions, emphasizing that oral history evidence supports the Indigenous perspective.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":125,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":127,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":129,"site_id":62},296602,1789734695,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":132},{"doc_id":129,"user_id":133,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":105,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":140,"language":141,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":142,"faqs":143,"seo_title":144,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":130,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},5909892115043,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","Court File No. 03-CV-261134CM1  \nONTARIO  \nSUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE  \nBETWEEN:  \nCHIPPEWAS OF NAWASH UNCEDED FIRST NATION and SAUGEEN FIRST NATION  \nPlaintiffs  \n-and –  \nTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, and  \nHER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO  \nDefendants  \n*****************************************************************************  \nCourt File No. 94-CQ-050872CM  \nONTARIO  \nSUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE  \nBETWEEN:  \nCHIPPEWAS OF SAUGEEN FIRST NATION and CHIPPEWAS OF NAWASH UNCEDED  \nFIRST NATION  \nPlaintiffs  \n-and –  \nTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA; HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO; THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF GREY; THE CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF BRUCE; THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF NORTHERN BRUCE PENINSULA; THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF SOUTH BRUCE PENINSULA; THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF SAUGEEN SHORES and THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF GEORGIAN BLUFFS  \nDefendants  \nREPLY SUBMISSIONS OF THE SAUGEEN OJIBWAY NATION  \n1. CROWN IMMUNITY ................................................................................................................ 5  \nOverview ..................................................................................................................................... 5  \nHistory and Evolution of Crown Immunity ................................................................................ 6  \nThe Relevant PACA Provisions ................................................................................................. 9  \nSON’s Position on PACA ......................................................................................................... 11  \nSON’s Reply to Ontario’s Position on PACA .......................................................................... 19  \n2. LIMITATIONS AND LACHES............................................................................................... 38  \nOverview................................................................................................................................... 38  \nFacts Relevant to Limitations and Laches ................................................................................ 40  \nSystemic Obstacles to Asserting Rights Effectively............................................................. 41  \nSON’s Assertion of Rights.................................................................................................... 86  \nCanada’s Position on SON’s Harvesting Rights................................................................. 103  \nLimitations Law ...................................................................................................................... 106  \nPurposes and Interpretation of Limitations ......................................................................... 106  \nInternational Commitments ................................................................................................ 112  \nReal Property Limitation Periods........................................................................................ 116  \nDiscoverability .................................................................................................................... 123  \nSummary of Application of Real Property Limitation Periods to Beneficial Ownership of Lands ................................................................................................................................... 130  \nLaches ..................................................................................................................................... 130  \nAcquiescence Branch .......................................................................................................... 131  \nPrejudice Branch ................................................................................................................. 134  \n3. ORAL HISTORY EVIDENCE .............................................................................................. 140  \nCanada’s approach to oral history eviden","cbCaivEL84XvQBC8","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaivEL84XvQBC8","pdf",2268909,258,"English","# REPLY SUBMISSIONS OF THE SAUGEEN OJIBWAY NATION\n## CROWN IMMUNITY\n## LIMITATIONS AND LACHES\n## ORAL HISTORY EVIDENCE\n## ARCHAEOLOGY","[{\"question\":\"What topics are covered in the reply submissions?\",\"answer\":\"The submissions address crown immunity, limitations and laches, oral history evidence, and archaeology, including challenges to rigidity and reliability arguments.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the document treat limitations and laches?\",\"answer\":\"It organizes the analysis into overview, relevant facts, systemic obstacles to asserting rights, the Nation’s assertion of rights, the positions of Canada, limitations law and its interpretation, and branches such as discoverability, acquiescence, and prejudice.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the document say about oral history evidence?\",\"answer\":\"It argues that Canada’s approach is too rigid and addresses Canada’s and Ontario’s positions, emphasizing that oral history evidence supports the Indigenous perspective.\"}]","REPLY SUBMISSIONS OF THE SAUGEEN OJIBWAY NATION - Reply Submissions - Part 1 | PDF",650]