As I have written about earlier, the Protection of Public Participation Act is aimed at combating strategy lawsuits against public participation and to guard against the vulnerability of the legal system to SLAPPs being used to censor public opinion, intimidate people and silence critics.
For a host of reasons, folks often enter contracts through verbal agreement either not fully appreciating that they are entering into a binding contractual relationship or because one or more parties has refused to agree to reduce the contract to writing.
It is an unfortunately common story in construction litigation: parties agree on a scope of work and price, the scope of work changes and the parties don’t go back to the bargaining table to reach an agreement on the new scope of work.
Intra-company disputes often involve two broad categories of remedies: oppression: where a minority shareholder claims they are being disadvantaged by the majority in some fashion and seek to have the court exercise its broad statutory discretion to correct the issue; and derivative actions: where a shareholder or director seeks to have the court compel a […]
Whenever parties fail to fully document the contractual agreement between them, the risk of litigation is heightened given the lack of prescribed remedies and consequences in addition to a wide spectrum of issues.
In my earlier article, Defamation, the Protection of Public Participation Act and Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, I wrote about the Protection of Public Participation Act (the “PPPA”), a piece of legislation aimed at combating strategy lawsuits against public participation (“SLAPPs”).
As discussed in my previous article, COVID-19, Builders Liens and Limitation Periods, since March 26, 2020, limitation periods in BC were suspended. This suspension was listed as of April 15, 2020 for builders lien issues.
When a strata issues fines or fees against owners, it often seeks legal assistance in doing so. A recent decision reviews when a strata is or is not entitled to recover part or all of those legal fees.
As was discussed in my previous article, Property, Parties, Price – How Far the Court Will Go to Insert the 3 P’s of Real Estate into a Contract, it is critical that parties to a contract of purchase and sale for real property take the time to properly document the terms of their contract.
As the court observed in its recent decision, All Out Contracting Ltd. v Gourlay, 2020 BCSC 481 (CanLII) (“All Out”), construction work begins before the owner(s) and contractor properly define their contractual relationship, if they ever do so
Pre-judgment garnishment is a powerful remedy that allows a creditor to secure their claims by garnishing funds owed to a debtor and holding them in court pending a further order or agreement of the parties.
Subject to clauses, waiver or satisfaction of subject to clauses, deposits and when deposits become non-refundable are issues in contracts of purchase and sale that often become the subject of litigation.
I’ve previously written on defamation within the context of social media and airing grievances about services on social media, and the recent decision of Rook v. Halcrow continues to underscore that social media posts are public domain.
It is one of the most common scenarios in construction litigation: work has completed, the contractor has rendered its final bill and an owner refuses to pay on the basis that there were delays or that there are defects or deficiencies.
In my previous article, Discharging a Builders’ Lien on Posting of Security: How Much is Enough?, I discussed the two pronged approach by the courts when considering what is sufficient security to be posted in order for a party to be able to discharge a builders’ lien.
There are innumerable reasons that parties may find themselves co-owning real property with friends, family or business partners and just as many reasons why that co-ownership relationship may turn sour.
While a contract can be formed by any combination of communications and oral and verbal agreements, it remains the most prudent course of action to reduce a contract to writing to avoid any ambiguities about what has or has not been agreed to.
In my previous article, Builders Liens: Strict Compliance or Lose Your Lien, I explored how a family company lost its lien rights by making the mistake of pursuing its lien in the name of its principal rather than the company.
In a number of previous articles, I have explored some of the difficulties encountered where parties fail to properly set out the contractual terms that dictate the rights and responsibilities between them.
The Statute of Frauds and Canadian jurisprudence require that for any contract of real property to be enforceable, it must contain an agreement with respect to three essential elements knowns as the 3 P’s: parties, property and price.
As discussed in a previous article, settlement agreements are effectively contracts which can be enforced through legal action and replace whatever legal, contractual or equitable rights were involved in the fight that preceded settlement.
As discussed in my previous article, Invitations to Tender: Why it is Important Both Bidders and Solicitors to Follow Proper Process, the solicitation of bids for public projects must follow a fair and transparent process.
While the law often concerns itself with compensating children who are injured as a result of negligence, it sometimes also has to grapple with whether a child can be held responsible for the injuries or loss suffered by others.
Settlement agreements that conclude litigation are often reached once the parties have gotten to a point of a loss of faith in one another or a complete breakdown in whatever relationship they may have enjoyed pre-litigation.
In previous articles, I discussed the interactions between attornment, territorial competence, the forum of convenience and the law informing where litigation will proceed. These issues all intersected in the recent decision, Boyd v. Cook.
Contractual interest can represent a significant component of the value of a contract for the party entitled to interest, a significant part of the costs of a contract to the party paying interest and a significant deterrent to a would be breaching party.
In a new decision in Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, the Supreme Court of Canada has affirmed that non union, non management, employees of federal undertakings may under the complaint process under the Canada Labour Code be reinstated.
In my previous article, Here, There or Anywhere: Where to Sue and be Sued, I discussed factors the Courts in BC consider when determining whether or not to adjudicate on matters where the matters could be determined in more than one legal jurisdiction. In this article, I will discuss a recent case, Naturex Inc. v. […]
In virtually all standard contracts of purchase and sale, the parties agree that the vendor will provide a property disclosure statement (“PDS”) and that the representations made in the PDS will survive the completion of the contract.
Too often, people mistakenly assume that because the home or renovations are done in accordance with architectural plans and within the requirements of the applicable municipality or district, that the home or renovations are sound.
Some of the most common questions asked by my clients are whether they should engage in settlement discussions with opposing parties and whether a settlement offer made to them is reasonable to accept.
If someone owes you money and you become involved in a legal dispute in BC, it is possible to seek a prejudgment garnishing order by the authority of the Court Order Enforcement Act for debts owed to you.