The Mi'kmaq in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick were unable to prove Aboriginal title to sites where they had cut logs for commercial purposes. The Court decided that, to establish Aboriginal title, they had to prove exclusive physical occupation of the specific sites where the cutting had taken place. Exclusivity could be proven by showing that they were in control of the sites and could have excluded others had they chosen to do so. Unlike in Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), the Court did not discuss the relevance of Indigenous law to proof of exclusive occupation. The Mi'kmaq were also unable to prove a treaty right to harvest logs for commercial purposes, as trade in logs had not been engaged in when the treaties relied on in R. v. Marshall (1999) were entered into in 1760-61.