Wanda Simek and Derek Ball win commercial construction trial

Wanda and Derek acted for High End Hotel, a contractor that had done the piling, foundation, and framing of a hotel in Fort St John, BC. High End sued the owner and general contractor for unpaid invoices. The defendants alleged in response that High End’s work was deficient, caused delays or was not approved by written change orders. The most contentious issue was the fact that the hotel was built 1.1 metres lower than specified in the architectural plans – who was responsible for this error?

The court found in favour of High End and concluded that the general contractor was responsible for the elevation error. The court preferred the evidence of High End’s principals and awarded judgment to High End.

This trial involved delving into construction details related to site preparation, land surveying, concrete pilings, grade beams, foundation slabs, framing a four-storey hotel, and complex roof truss plans.

For more information on this case, visit 2022 BCSC 391. For more information on Allen / McMillan’s construction law practice, please contact Wanda at wanda@amlc.ca or Derek at derek@amlc.ca

Liam Babbitt successfully defends action to force the sale of a jointly owned property

Liam successfully defended an action brought by a co-owner under the Partition of Property Act (PPA) to force the sale of a jointly owned property.

Typically, when two parties equally own a property, either one can apply to the court to have it sold under the PPA. In this case, however, after living in a property for about a year, the co-owners decided to rent it out. The co-owners later separated and one of them brought an action to compel the sale of the property under the PPA. Liam established that in order to receive an order for the sale of a jointly owned property, a co-owner must have the right to immediate possession of the property. In this case, as the property was rented out, the court found that the co-owner did not have immediate possession of the property and was not entitled to an order for its sale.

For more information on this case, visit Benias v Lee, 2021 BCSC 2312 or contact Liam at liam@amlc.ca.

Greg Allen and Derek Ball win two Court of Appeal cases in one day

We are happy to announce an impressive achievement by Greg Allen and Derek Ball – two Court of Appeal victories in a single day, involving complex municipal law issues. Greg and Derek were tasked with defending a judge’s decision on one point in the case, and appealing the judge’s decision on a different point. In the first appeal, they successfully defended the judge’s conclusion that a municipal approving officer owes no duty of care to future purchasers of subdivided land. In the companion appeal, Greg and Derek successfully argued that a covenant on title registered under section 219 of the Land Title Act may include release terms, and that the release language in the subject covenant was sufficient to release the respondents’ claims against the District of Sechelt.

These two appeals are important developments in municipal law, as municipalities across the province routinely impose section 219 covenants as a condition of approving subdivisions. The Court of Appeal’s decision with respect to the availability of release language in section 219 covenants will provide important clarity and guidance for municipalities, developers and individual property owners going forward.

For more information on Allen / McMillan’s municipal law practice, please contact Greg at greg@amlc.ca.   

Wanda Simek wins real estate commission hearing

On April 22, 2021, the British Columbia Supreme Court released their decision in Well Sing Property Development Ltd. v. MacDonald Platinum Marketing Ltd. (2021 BCSC 755). AMLC’s Wanda Simek represented MacDonald Platinum Marketing, a real estate brokerage firm specializing in the marketing of pre-construction residential developments, in a contractual dispute with the developer, Well Sing, over real estate commissions. 

The contract in question provided that Well Sing would pay Platinum commissions in exchange for marketing and sales services. Platinum provided these services, and successfully sold out 100% of the development in one day, at the highest price point per square foot ever achieved in Richmond for similar projects. 50% of the commissions were paid out by Well Sing; however, Well Sing advised that it would not authorize the other 50% of commissions pending the determination of a separate negligence claim against Platinum. This claim alleged that Platinum had undervalued the units in the development and sold them at a value lower than they were worth. 

At this hearing, Wanda successfully argued that Platinum had fulfilled its contractual obligations, and was contractually entitled to the commissions that had been earned upon the successful closing of each contract of purchase and sale. The court agreed that the developer was not entitled to tie up the commissions pending the determination of its negligence claim against Platinum, and had no equitable grounds to withhold payment as prejudgment security. The court ordered that the commissions be paid out to Platinum and also awarded Platinum its costs of the application. 

Congratulations Wanda!

Liam Babbitt and Suzy Flader win 2-day small claims trial

On March 31 and April 1, 2021, Liam Babbitt and Suzy Flader appeared in the British Columbia Provincial Court representing the defendant, a realtor, in Hoang v Luo. The claimant sought a portion of their realtor’s commission on the basis of an alleged oral agreement.

At the conclusion of the claimant’s case, Liam and Suzy brought an application to dismiss the claim on the basis of section 4 of the Real Estate Services Act, which bars unlicensed or non-exempt people under the Act from receiving remuneration in relation to providing real estate services. The court agreed that the alleged oral agreement was caught by section 4 of the Real Estate Services Act and dismissed the claim. The court also found that on a balance of probabilities the claimant failed to prove that an oral agreement was reached. We congratulate Liam and Suzy on their victory!

Wes McMillan and Kaitlyn Meyer win shareholders’ and directors’ dispute

Wes and Kaitlyn acted for a businessman, who, along with a disbarred lawyer, established and grew a marina in Richmond, BC, beginning in 1965. The parties’ relationship deteriorated until eventually, they agreed it should end. They each filed an oppression claim under the Business Corporations Act (“BCA”). Before the matter was heard, the opposing party passed away. In a 9-day hearing, the court examined a multitude of issues, including whether the parties were in a partnership, whether they each engaged in oppressive conduct under the BCA and ultimately, what remedy would be just and equitable in the circumstances.  

The court ruled in favour of AMLC’s client and dismissed the opposing party’s petition. It concluded that the parties’ relationship was that of shareholders under the BCA and not a partnership. Further, the court found that the opposing party’s conduct was oppressive and that, in the circumstances, his estate should purchase the client’s shares in the business. After examining competing expert reports, the court valued the client’s shares at $1.45 million.

For more information on this case, visit Short v Ewachniuk, 2021 BCSC 994. For more information on Allen / McMillan’s shareholders’ and directors’ disputes practice, please contact Wes at wes@amlc.ca or Kaitlyn at kaitlyn@amlc.ca.