The Supreme Court of British Columbia allowed an application by the plaintiffs to amend their Notice of Civil Claim. The most controversial amendment involved a plea of estoppel by acquiescence. The plaintiffs sought to add an alternative allegation that British Columbia is estopped from denying the plaintiffs’ exercise of treaty rights in the disputed area, or the right to be consulted, due to the absence of any opposition by the Province since the signing of Treaty 8 about the location of the western boundary. Johnston J. held that estoppel had been sufficiently pleaded. The Court also rejected an attempt by the co-defendant Kaska Dena Council to revive an issue about “surrender” in response to the amendments.