Abstract
Courts across the world continue to build a jurisprudence that explains and justifies the transfer of Indigenous sovereignty and property to European colonial powers. These courts are developing tests for Aboriginal peoples and the Crown to satisfy in order to recognise modern Aboriginal title in land. This article compares these tests in two countries - Canada and Aotearoa New Zealand - to better understand the rationality of the tests and the possibilities for different constructions. The usefulness in this comparative analysis is to provide deeper understanding for achieving pinpoints of hope for more reconciled systems of justice.