To be honest, I don’t know. I cannot imagine any jurisdiction rolling over and saying, “Okay, we give up; it’s yours,” especially if they have an argument to the contrary. Long court battles are nothing new, and if there is a constitutional question to be decided, then both the provinces and the feds tend to agree that the courts should decide it.
Keep in mind, though, that many such division-of-powers issues are quite clearly federal or provincial. No province is going to establish its own military, create its own currency (though Alberta did try, back in the 1930s), or establish diplomatic missions in foreign lands. Similarly, the feds are not about to regulate speed limits on highways, establish landlord-tenant laws, or look after issuing liquor licenses to bars.
The questions arise when the issue could go one way or the other, mainly because of a lack of mention, or just plain ambiguity in the wording of the original 1867 constitution, and occasionally in the 1982 Charter. Railways are specifically mentioned in 1867 Constitution, but aviation is not. Do we treat aviation the same as railways, or is a different solution needed? Telegraphs are specifically mentioned as federal in the 1867 Constitution; does this extend to TV and radio broadcasting, given that the latter can go over the air, instead of being hardwired like a telegraph is? And how many arguments could arise over the 1867 Constitution s. 92(16): “Generally all Matters of a merely local or private Nature in the Province”? How local is local; how private is private? Rules and regulations regarding marriage are undoubtedly provincial, but can the feds take the matter of gay marriage to court under 1982 Charter s. 15, the equality clause, and apply it Canada-wide, over the objections of some provinces?
As I said, the questions arise when the issue could go one way or the other, and in spite of the fact that the framers of our constitution tried to avoid arguments over the separation of powers, such as arose under the US Constitution’s 10th Amendment, it’s become clear over the years that there are, and will continue to be, questions regarding the separation of powers that need to be resolved.