Chiefs from various First Nations were in front of Regina Court of Kings Bench on Friday. (Daniel Reech/980 CJME)

By Susan McNeil

Land claims

Beardy’s & Okemasis, One Arrow call legal win against former law firm ‘historic’

Jun 30, 2025 | 3:35 PM

A dispute with their previous legal counsel over fees has been resolved in favour of Beardy’s & Okemasis Cree Nation, returning around $900,000 to the band’s bank account.

In 2005, Beardy’s hired Maurice Law, an Alberta-based firm that specializes in helping First Nations to resolve outstanding ‘cows and plows’ claims against the federal government. In 2021 however, they fired Maurice Law citing concerns including excessive fees. They then received a bill for $1,137,956.65 plus interest, and a proportionate share of any contingency fee which would have been about $10 million.

Saskatchewan’s Court of Kings Bench ruled that the contingency retainer was not fair or reasonable.

“Today is a great day – on this historical day, we’re going to call it – because a milestone has been achieved and we’re all happy and honoured to be here,” said Beardy’s Chief Edwin Ananas.

He said they hired a new law firm in 2021 when they started asking questions about Maurice Law’s practice.

Baseball Provincials

18U Royals prepare for provincials after hot streak to end regular season

1h ago

HIT AND RUN

Meadow Lake man charged after dragging victim with stolen vehicle in Saskatoon

2h ago

Crime

Woman, youth charged after serious assault in Lloydminster

3h ago

“They found significant errors in our documents which caused us to endure huge amount of legal fees, contingency fees and all of that over our specific claims,” said Ananas.

One of the most significant was the charge for 25 hours of legal work in one day.

“Go figure out how they got that 25 hours in one day. I still don’t know or understand how they got that. It’s very, very shocking how that can be.”

Ananas called the win ‘bittersweet’ and said he is still shocked at how much money Maurice Law is taking away from First Nations people. Ron Maurice, the founder of the firm, is himself Indigenous.

“You claim to be First Nations. First Nations don’t treat First Nations the way you did,” Ananas said in a news conference in front of the Regina Court of King’s Bench on Friday.

“We don’t treat each other like that. We have respect for each other, that is the First Nation rule. We show each other respect, regardless of what we do.”

Included in the Beardy’s case was that of One Arrow First Nation, which had also retained Maurice law and concerns over the amount it was being billed.

Because of the wording of their retainer agreements, One Arrow’s legal case was only partially successful.

They will have to pay $25,000 plus interest on one claim and $65,000 plus a six per cent contingency fee when their claim regarding land taken from their western boundary by the government and given to the Metis is resolved.

Maurice Law defended it’s fees, saying they take their responsibility to reconciliation seriously.

In an emailed statement, a partner with the firm, Melanie Webber, said they’ve been willing to take on clients who could not afford to advance their claim and have worked for decades on claims with no guarantee of success.

“We are proud of the significant results we have achieved – not only for our clients, but in advancing reconciliation for Indigenous communities across Canada. In fact, the claim Maurice Law advanced on behalf of Beardy’s & Okemasis Cree Nation for almost twenty years prior to our termination has become an important precedent, changing the way in which all Specific Claims are valued and compensated in negotiations with Canada – it is one of the cases of which Maurice Law is most proud.”

Webber acknowledged that some of their fee arrangements were recently overturned by the Saskatchewan Court of Kings’ Bench, however, Maurice Law believes the decision included errors of law and they intend to appeal the decision to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

She also said that the firm will continue its work to achieve justice and reconciliation for their Indigenous clients, regardless of the outcome of the decision of the King’s Bench court.

In the emailed statement, Webber said that some competitors of their firm have been encouraging Maurice Law’s clients to challenge their fees.

“While they claim to be doing this for noble reasons, the truth is they are being opportunistic,” she wrote.

—

Editors note: This article was updated on July 1, 2025 to include comments from Maurice Law.

—

susan.mcneil@pattisonmedia.com

On BlueSky @susanmcneil.bsky.social