parties and is necessary or obvious in light of the particular circumstances of the agreement.20 The law is also clear that “where
the approval of a third party is necessary in order to enable
a contract to proceed, it may be implied that the party in a position to seek that approval must make reasonable efforts to
 I therefore have no difficulty concluding that under s. 2(2)
of the 1965 agreement, Canada undertook to consult with the
Indian bands, that it failed to do so and thus breached this provision of the agreement.
If the Indian Bands had Been Consulted
 Canada argues that even if it had consulted with the
Indian bands, as it was obliged to do under s. 2(2), there is no
evidence that any of the Indian bands would have provided any
ideas or advice that could have prevented the Indian children
who had been removed and placed in non-aboriginal foster or
adoptive homes from losing their aboriginal identity. Counsel for
Canada put it this way: “[W]ould life have been different had
they been consulted?”
 This is an odd and, frankly, insulting submission. Canada
appears to be saying that even if the extension of child welfare
services to their reserves had been fully explained to the Indian
bands and if each band had been genuinely consulted about
their concerns in this regard, that no meaningful advice or ideas
would have been forthcoming.
 In the documentation produced by Canada over the
course of the class period, there are numerous memoranda and
letters from both federal and First Nations representatives setting out in some detail the kinds of things that could have been
done to prevent the loss of aboriginal identity post-placement.
For example, educating non-aboriginal foster and adoptive
parents about the relevant cultural differences and providing
them with information about the aboriginal child’s entitlement
to various federal benefits and payments.
 Direct evidence from Indian band representatives as to
what they would have said or advised had they been consulted
in 1965 was presented, but in broad brush. Wilmer Nadjiwon,
former chief of the Chippewas Nawash, filed an affidavit
that stated if his Indian band had been consulted he would have
20 McCamus, The Law of Contracts, 2nd ed. (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2012)
21 Ibid., at 783-84.