DRIPA and Property Rights in BC: What Homeowners Need to Know

What Is DRIPA?
DRIPA stands for the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act. It is a BC law passed in 2019 with support from all political parties at the time. [1]

The purpose of DRIPA is to bring BC laws into alignment with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). That is an international human rights framework that recognizes Indigenous Peoples' rights to their lands, cultures, and self-determination.

In plain language, DRIPA commits the BC government to consult with First Nations on decisions affecting their traditional territories. It does not create radical new rules overnight. Instead, it requires the province to gradually update its laws so they respect Indigenous rights.

The Big Question: Does DRIPA Affect Private Property Rights?
This is the concern most homeowners have, and it is a fair one. Here is what you need to know.

The Short Answer
No court has taken away a private homeowner's property because of DRIPA. Neither the BC government nor any court has ruled that DRIPA overrides existing private property titles.

Why Are People Worried?
Two recent court decisions have created some legal uncertainty. Let us look at each one.

1. The Gitxaala Case (Mining Claims)
The Gitxaala and Ehattesaht First Nations challenged BC's online mining claim system. Under the old rules, anyone could stake a mining claim on Crown land without consulting First Nations. In December 2025, the BC Court of Appeal ruled that DRIPA creates legally enforceable obligations. That means provincial laws must be interpreted consistently with UNDRIP. [2]

What this does NOT mean: This case was about mining claims on Crown land, not privately owned homes.

2. The Cowichan Case (Aboriginal Title)
In August 2025, the BC Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling that the Cowichan Nation holds Aboriginal title to about 300 hectares of land in south Richmond, including privately owned properties. [3] This was the first time in Canadian history that Aboriginal title has been established over lands that include private, fee simple ownership interests.

Here is the crucial part. Both the court and Cowichan leaders have repeatedly stated that this ruling does not affect private homeowners. The Cowichan Nation did not seek to invalidate any privately held fee simple titles. [4] Instead, they sought a declaration that the BC government has a duty to negotiate the reconciliation of Crown granted fee simple interests with Cowichan Aboriginal title.

However, the ruling has created significant uncertainty. Justice Barbara Young wrote in her decision: "I accept that a declaration of Aboriginal title may give rise to some uncertainty for the fee simple title holders and it may have consequences for their interests in land." [3]

The Appeals Process: Where Things Stand
The Cowichan case is not over. In fact, it is the longest trial in Canadian history at 513 days, and it will run even longer. [7] All seven parties have filed applications to appeal, including the province, the federal government, the Cowichan Nation, the City of Richmond, the port authority, and two neighbouring First Nations. [7]

The appeal cannot begin yet because the trial is not officially concluded. A final order must be written by the judge before the Court of Appeal can set a date. That final order is now delayed pending an application from a private landowner (Montrose Properties) asking to reopen the trial because they were not a party to the original case. [7]

Both the province and the Cowichan Nation have stated clearly that they are not seeking to invalidate any privately held fee simple titles through the negotiation or appeal processes. [4]

The appeal process is expected to take years. [7]

Mortgage Concerns in Richmond: What Is Happening?
The uncertainty from the Cowichan ruling has had real-world consequences for some property owners in Richmond. Several homeowners and businesses have reported difficulty renewing their mortgages or securing financing.

Richmond Councillor Alexa Loo brought a motion to city council in November 2025 asking the provincial and federal governments to step in.  [5] According to Loo, residents in the affected area are worried about:

• Renewing their mortgages
• Being charged higher rates because they are in the claim area
• Losing their properties
• Being unable to sell or get insurance

Gord Maichin, who owns a cranberry bog in the affected area, criticized the court process because private landowners were not notified about the proceedings. "That's wrong. We are directly affected by this," he said. [5]

Federal government response: A written question was tabled in the House of Commons on January 26, 2026, asking what the federal government plans to do to ensure landowners impacted by the ruling can maintain their ability to finance their mortgages while the case is appealed. [6]

Provincial government response: Premier David Eby announced in December 2025 that the province is developing a plan to provide $150 million in loan guarantees to support homeowners and businesses, ensuring they can access borrowing, refinance mortgages, or obtain financing for property purchases. [4]

What Is Happening Politically? The political landscape around DRIPA has shifted significantly in early 2026.

Original Plan: Amend DRIPA
After the December 2025 Gitxaala ruling, Premier David Eby announced plans to introduce amendments to DRIPA in the Spring 2026 legislative session. The goal was to clarify and reaffirm the provincial government's ultimate authority and address concerns from the business community and the public. [8]

New Plan: A Three-Year Pause
In early April 2026, Eby changed course. Instead of amending DRIPA, the government now plans to suspend select problematic parts of DRIPA for up to three years (through 2028). [8]

Why the Change?
The shift happened for two main reasons:

1. Opposition from First Nations. First Nations leaders strongly opposed amending DRIPA at this time. Some called the proposed changes an "absolute betrayal" of the evolving relationship with the NDP. [11] Premier Eby acknowledged that the issue is "incredibly challenging" for the three Indigenous MLAs in his caucus. [11]

2. Protecting the government's appeal. The pause is also a measure to protect the provincial government's appeal request to the Supreme Court of Canada to review the December 2025 Gitxaala decision. [8] Eby described the suspension as the "least invasive" way of mitigating the ruling's impact while the court process plays out.

Political Reactions
The opposition Conservative Party has strongly criticized the move. Interim Leader Trevor Halford called it a political delay tactic, noting that a three-year pause conveniently pushes accountability beyond the next election in Fall 2028. [9]

"This is not a solution, this is a political move," said Halford. "We are now being told parts of the law may be suspended while court cases play out, but no one can say what happens after that. That is not certainty, that is prolonged instability." [9]

First Nations Summit leader Robert Phillips has called on the Indigenous members of Eby's caucus to either stand down or vote against the pause. [11]

Where the Main Players Stand (Updated April 2026)