The Supreme Court of Canada has taught us through two cases, one being the case of Derrickson v. Derrickson and the other one being Paul v. Paul. They were twin cases.
The one more on point is the Derrickson case. It looked at the situation of Mr. and Mrs. Derrickson, who were in that very situation that you are pointing to. The court first concluded that in effect provincial laws relating to the specific issue of matrimonial real property within family law could not apply on lands set aside as reserves. Then, after going through an analysis of the conflict that would have with the Indian Act, the court turned around and identified the remedy of the compensation payment, or the payment in lieu of division of assets. It found that there would be no conflict, as there were no provisions in the Indian Act dealing with compensation payments, and that it was a remedy that might be applicable in the case of Derrickson v. Derrickson.