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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
The local housing market appears to be on the rise. While this is a good sign of our recovering economy, it is also an appropriate time for purchasers to remind themselves of some of the risks and their legal rights when purchasing a home. The maxim, “buyer beware” (or caveat emptor), applies to purchasing a […]
This post discusses the hundreds, if not thousands, of land contracts in British Columbia that may be negatively affected by section 73 of the Land Title Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 250 and the line of legal authorities stemming from International Paper Industries Ltd. v. Top Line Industries Inc., 1996 CanLII 3340 (BC CA) ("Top Line").
The economic downturn in 2008 created circumstances where purchasers were unwilling or unable to complete on strata units that were now valued at less than the purchase price in the Purchase Agreement.Purchasers sought to avoid their obligations under the purchase agreement which developers wanted to enforce. This led to litigation with developers seeking damages from the purchaser’s breach of contract and the purchasers seeking an [...]
With limited case law available with respect to the Real Estate Development Marketing Act (“REDMA”), each decision made under REDMA will help to clarify the interpretation and application of the legislation. The British Columbia Supreme Court recently made such a decision that those involved in the real estate development industry should be aware of. This decision emphasizes the importance of full disclosure in [...]
In Chan v. Owners, Strata Plan VR-151, 2010 BCSC 1725, the Supreme Court of British Columbia considered the ability of a strata corporation to regulate the air space above a strata lot – an issue that had not been considered in the context of the Strata Property Act, S.B.C. 1998, c. 43 (the “SPA”) or its precursor legislation. Chan also demonstrates that purchasers should be wary of assurances of “grandfather [...]
Certain Kelowna residents may be able to legally earn money from secondary suites on their property. Those owning single family residences may be permitted (via rezoning approved by city council) to include within these homes a secondary suite or construct an “accessory building” (no closer than 5 m to the principle dwelling) and create a secondary suite within that accessory building. Owners may then rent out this space to [...]