A judge dismissed Prince Rupert Port Authority’s attempt to strike a lawsuit, something it had argued was a ‘collateral attack’ on the Crown’s approval of a gas export terminal.
B.C.’s second largest port has failed in its attempt to strike a lawsuit from a First Nation claiming it was misled when it signed a benefits agreement connected to a gas export terminal in Prince Rupert.
The legal action dates back to July 30, 2024, when Metlakatla First Nation sued the Prince Rupert Port Authority (PRPA) over the planned expansion of a bulk commodities terminal on Ridley Island.
In her Jan. 30, 2025, decision, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Edlyn Laurie rejected the port authority’s attempts to characterize the suit as only fit for a Federal Court.
Metlakatla, wrote Laurie, “does not seek the reversal of the Crown Approval, rather it seeks compensation for losses.”
Metlakatla claims it holds unextinguished Aboriginal rights and title in and around the port. That includes an “inescapable economic component” to its Aboriginal rights, with its title encompassing the right to exclusively occupy and decide what the land is used for, the nation claims.
At first, the First Nation appeared to back the project.
The suit claims the port entered into a development agreement with Vopak Development Canada Inc. in 2015, granting the company exclusive rights within the port to receive, store and load certain products for export, including liquefied petroleum gas.
The Crown approved the project in 2022 and the port authority entered into a lease with Vopak involving more than 272 acres of port land.
A year later, Metlakatla signed a mutual benefits agreement with Vopak.
The relationship between Metlakatla, the port and Vopak has since appeared to have soured.
In its lawsuit, the First Nation claimed the port authority had failed to consult them about an “export monopoly” and failed to take any steps to assess how that monopoly would impact Metlakatla’s interests.
Read the full article at BIV: B.C. court clears path for First Nation lawsuit against port over ‘export monopoly’.