COMPANY
& FINANCE |
Company and Finance News:
Proposed Revisions to the British Columbia Society Act
In early August of 2014, the British Columbia Ministry of
Finance released a White
Paper containing policy recommendations for a new Society
Act to regulate the governance, organization and operation
of non-share capital entities incorporated in British Columbia.
The White Paper includes the full text of the proposed new Society
Act, and includes annotations setting out background
information on the proposed legislation, including the policy
intention behind the new provisions. The proposed legislation
maintains and builds upon the basic framework of the current
Society Act. Societies will continue
to have constitutions and bylaws that are filed at the corporate
registry, and restrictions on share capital and the distribution
of assets. However, the proposed legislation provides a degree
of modernization and adopts a more user-friendly drafting style.
Read the full
article by Brendan
Burns with the law firm Miller Thomson LLP.
BC Securities – Policies & Instruments
The following policies and instruments were published on the
BCSC website in the month of August:
-
BCN 2014/10 – Notice of clearing agency and
compensation for loss related amendments to the Securities Act and Securities Regulation and required form
for applying for compensation
- CSA
Multilateral Staff Notice 24-311 – Qualifying
Central Counterparties – This notice indicates that the
central counterparties listed in Table 1 of the notice can be
considered qualifying central counterparties under the
standard on the capital treatment of certain bank exposures to
central counterparties developed by the Basel Committee on
Banking Supervision.
For more information visit the BC Securities website.
PST Bulletins
The following PST bulletins and notices were issued in the month
of August:
For more information, visit the Consumer Taxes website.
New Annotations Posted to Arbitration Laws
The first of many annotations have now been posted to domestic
and international arbitration laws. You can identify an
annotated section by looking at the annotation icon located on
the far right side of each section. For example, if you go to section 15 of the Arbitration Act, you will see a
star icon adjacent to the section. Click the star icon to view
the Expert annotation. To view all annotations under an Act
click the "View Annotations for this Law" button on the top menu
bar.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
Training Tax Credits Regulation
(243/2007) |
RETROACTVE
to Sept. 1/13 |
by
Reg 159/2014 |
RETROACTVE
to Apr. 1/14 |
RETROACTVE
to June 30/14 |
Aug. 22/14 |
ENERGY
& MINES |
Energy and Mines News:
BC LNG: Environmental Assessment
Process for Pipeline Projects
In a previous
post, the Environmental Assessment (EA) Process applicable
to the proposed BC LNG Export Terminals [was discussed]. Here,
the EA Process applicable to various Pipelines designed to serve
the LNG Export Terminals [is discussed]. Unlike the LNG Export
Terminals, where EA jurisdiction has historically been shared
between the Federal and Provincial governments, the Pipelines
are generally governed only by the BC EA Process, as
administered by the BC
Environmental Assessment Office (BC EAO). This is largely
a result of Federal Regulations (enacted October 24, 2013) which
remove from the Federal EA Process any Pipelines which are
effectively intra-provincial in nature – as all of the
currently proposed LNG Pipelines are. The BC EAO EA process
consists of three Stages: Read the full
article by Cameron
Anderson and Jonathan
Drance with Stikeman Elliott.
Wind Opponents Lose Health Challenges
around the World
A recent report by the Energy
and Policy Institute documents the rejection of anti-wind
health claims by 48 courts and tribunals in Canada, Australia,
New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the US. In one anomalous US
case, two turbines which had had a known problem were ordered to
be shut down 12 hours a day, four hours longer a day than the
owner planned. According to the report,
wind opponents' health claims have been rejected in almost all
cases. "Since 1998, 49 hearings have been held under rules of
legal evidence in at least five English-speaking countries and
four types of courts [and tribunals] regarding wind energy,
noise, and health. Forty-eight assessed the evidence and found
no potential for harm to human health. The sole outlier is an
instructive but unique case. Read the full
article by Dianne Saxe with Saxe Law Office.
Independent Expert Engineering Review Launched
Following Mount Polley Dam Breach
The Government of British Columbia, with the support of the Soda
Creek Indian Band (Xats'ull First Nation) and Williams Lake
Indian Band, has ordered an independent engineering
investigation and inquiry into the Mount Polley tailings pond
breach, and independent third-party reviews of all 2014 Dam
Safety Inspections for every tailings pond at a permitted mine
in the province. The independent engineering investigation and
inquiry is authorized under the Mount Polley Investigation and
Inquiry Regulation, issued pursuant to section 8 of the Ministry of Energy and Mines Act.
The investigation will be conducted by a panel of experts that
will investigate the cause of the Mount Polley Mine Tailings
Storage Facility failure, including geotechnical standards,
design of the dam, maintenance, regulations, inspections regimes
and other matters the panel deems appropriate. This section also
provides the panel with the ability to compel evidence and
authorizes the Minister to require the company to cover costs of
the inquiry. Read the official government news
release.
New Energy and Mines Annotations Posted
The first of many annotations have now been posted to the energy
and mining-related laws. You can identify an annotated section
by looking at the annotation icon located on the far right side
of each section. For example, if you go to section 19 (2) of the Mineral Tenure Act, you will see a
star icon adjacent to the section. Click the star icon to view
the Expert annotation. To view all annotations under an Act,
click the "View Annotations for this Law" button on the top menu
bar. Expect to see many more annotations posted in the coming
weeks and months.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
Mount Polley Investigation and Inquiry
Regulation (158/2014) |
NEW
Aug. 18/14 |
see
Reg 158/2014 |
FAMILY
& CHILDREN |
Family and Children
News:
Supreme Court Releases Important Judgment:
First Decision on Tracing, the Presumption of
Advancement and the Valuation of Excluded Property
[On August 15th], Mr. Justice Butler of the Supreme Court of
British Columbia released his decision in Remmem
v Remmem, a case which ... is probably the first
case addressing how property brought into a relationship is to
be handled under the new Family Law Act. The Family Law
Act imposes a new plan for the division of property
between separated spouses that is wholly different from the old
Family
Relations Act, and, if anything, is more along the
lines of how property is divided under Alberta's Matrimonial
Property Act and Saskatchewan's Family
Property Act. This is how it works in a nutshell:
- under s. 81, both spouses are entitled to an equal interest
in the family property;
- family property is defined in s. 84 as all property owned by
either spouse on the day the spouses separate, including real
property, corporate interests, bank accounts, pensions,
retirement savings and so on;
- the court can divide family property unequally under s. 95,
but only if an equal division would be "significantly unfair,"
having regard to a list of factors set out at s. 95(2);
- under s. 87, the value of family property – and only
family property – is its fair market value, determined
either at the date of trial or the date of settlement;
- under s. 85, certain property, such as property brought by a
spouse into the relationship and property received by a spouse
as a gift or inheritance, is excluded from the pool of family
property;
- under s. 96, excluded property remains the property of the
spouse who owns it; however,
- under s. 84, any increase in the value of excluded property
during the relationship is shareable family property.
Read the full
article by JP Boyd.
BCCA: Separation Agreement Provided Ineffective Waiver
of Entitlement to Pension Plan Survivor Benefits
The recent Court of Appeal case Tarr
Estate v. Tarr, 2014 BCCA 315, deals with the legal
nature of survivor pension benefits and how they may be
effectively waived in a separation agreement between spouses.
The Tarrs separated in 2002 after 38 years of marriage. Ms. Tarr
was named as her husband's irrevocable beneficiary under his
pension plan. The parties signed a Separation Agreement in 2007
which provided that each party would retain "for his or her own
use absolutely, free of any claim by the other . . . pension and
pension rights." The parties did not take any further actions to
remove Ms. Tarr as the beneficiary of her husband's pension
plan. Mr. Tarr subsequently remarried in 2008, and died in 2010.
Following Mr. Tarr's death, Ms. Tarr received the pension
benefits pursuant to the pension plan. Mr. Tarr's new partner,
as executor for his estate, sought and received a declaration in
the BCSC that the survivor benefits paid to Ms. Tarr were held
in trust for the estate, on the basis that those benefits had
been waived by the Separation Agreement. Read the full
article by Gagan Mann and posted on Watson Goepel –
Vancouver Family Lawyers Blog.
New Annotations Published to
Family Law Act and Others
The first of many annotations have now been posted throughout
the Family Law Act and other related
laws. You can see if a section has been annotated by looking at
the annotation icon located on the far right side of a section.
For example, if you go to the Family Law Act and click section 251 from the table of contents,
you will see a star icon adjacent to the section. Click the star
icon to view the annotation. To view all annotations under an
Act, click the "View Annotations for this Law" button on the top
menu bar.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
Public Guardian and Trustee Fees Regulation
(312/2000) |
Aug. 1/14 |
by
Reg 154/2014 |
FOREST
& ENVIRONMENT |
Forest and Environment News:
Judicial Review and the Forest Practices
Board: A New Alternative
A recent decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court has
given an unexpected boost to the status of BC's Forest Practices
Board (Board). In Western
Canada Wilderness Committee v. British Columbia, two
environmental advocacy groups (referred to as WC2), challenged
the Minister of Environment's decision not to issue
‘Section 7 Notices' under the Forest Planning and Practices Regulation
(Regulation) in relation to Coastal Douglas Fir (CDF). Among
other things, section 5(1) of the Forest and Range Practices Act
(FRPA) requires that before the Ministry of Forest, Lands and
Natural Resource Operations (FLNRO) may approve a forest
stewardship plan (FSP) to authorize timber harvesting
activities, the FSP must specify intended results and strategies
in relation to "objectives set by government." In turn, various
objectives set by government are specified in the Regulation.
The government's objective for wildlife under section 7(1) of
the Regulation is "to conserve sufficient wildlife habitat
… for … the survival of species at risk." Read the full
article by Jeff
Waatainen with Davis LLP and published in the BC
Forest Professional Magazine.
BC Supreme Court Issues Major Award
for Remediation of Contaminated Site
The BC Supreme Court issued a key decision in the area of
contaminated sites [on August 25th], awarding $4.75
million in "reasonably incurred" remediation costs to the
plaintiff, JI Properties, Inc. ("JI Properties"). The award
compensated JI Properties for money it spent remediating
contamination on James Island, BC. This award is the largest of
its kind to-date. The decision is potentially precedent-setting,
contributing to the development of BC's contaminated sites law
in a number of areas. The decision:
- reiterates that "polluter pays" underpins the entire Environmental Management Act
("EMA") contaminated sites regime, by finding the defendant
polluter responsible for paying all of the plaintiff's
reasonably incurred remediation costs;
- found the limitation period for cost recovery actions under
the 1996 Limitation
Act is six years and does not begin until all of
the costs of remediation are incurred;
- held that comfort letters issued to landowners by the
Ministry of Environment prior to the introduction of the EMA
are not the same as Certificates of Compliance under the EMA
and do not protect a responsible person from liability for
remediation costs; and
- applied a broad, purposive approach to evaluating the
reasonableness of remediation costs, and accepts that reliance
on expert consultants is a strong indicia of reasonableness.
Read the
full article by Michael
Manhas and Jana
McLean with Bull, Housser & Tupper LLP.
Environmental Appeal Board Decisions
There was only one decision made by the Environmental Appeal
Board in the month of August:
Environmental Management Act:
Emily
Toews; Elisabeth Stannus v. Director, Environmental
Management Act [Preliminary Applications –
Granted in Part]
New Environmental Annotations Posted
The first of many annotations have now been posted to various
environmental laws. You can identify an annotated section by the
annotation icon located on the far right side of each section.
For example, if you go to the table of contents of the Environmental Management Act you
will see a star icon adjacent to the title at the top. Click the
star icon to view the Expert annotation. To view all annotations
under an Act, click the "View Annotations for this Law" button
on the top menu bar. You can expect to see a significant number
of annotations posted in the coming weeks, including annotations
to forestry-related laws.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
There were no
amendments this month. |
HEALTH |
Private Health Care Lawsuit Delayed amid
Settlement Talks, Prompting Criticism
A Vancouver surgeon's lawsuit over patient access to private
health care in BC has been pushed back by six months while he
tries to reach a settlement with the province. Dr. Brian Day's
case against the BC government was supposed to go to trial on
September 8, but after an appearance in BC Supreme Court on
[August 25th], the trial was adjourned until March 2,
2015. According to the Ministry of Justice, it was Day who
applied for the adjournment. The surgeon's lawyer, Peter Gall,
said the adjournment was requested "to enable the parties to
discuss a possible resolution," but would not comment further.
Day, the co-owner of Vancouver's Cambie Surgery Centre, launched
the legal challenge in 2009. Read The Vancouver Sun
article.
BC Supreme Court Breathes Life into New Breed
of Potential Pharma-Related Class Action
Whereby Innovator Profits Are at Risk
In Canada, innovator drug companies can protect their market
exclusivity from generic copycats by asserting patents against
the generic manufacturer in litigation under the PM(NOC)
Regulations. Until now, the consequences of losing PM(NOC)
litigation was the potential payment of damages to the generic
whose market access was delayed by the litigation. These
so-called "section 8 damages" are limited to the actual loss
suffered by the generic during that specific period of delay.
Public policy is such that the profits earned by the innovator
during that period cannot, however, be disgorged pursuant to
section 8 of the PM(NOC) Regulations. In this potential class
action, however, the representative plaintiff seeks disgorgement
of the profits Pfizer earned during the period it prevented
generic competition from Teva for VIAGRA by asserting a patent
that was ultimately found invalid in PM(NOC) litigation. The
plaintiff's claim is based on the theory that people overpaid
Pfizer for VIAGRA relative to what they could have paid had
Pfizer not wrongfully delayed generic competition through the
assertion of an invalid patent. Read the full
article by David
Tait, Steven
Tanner and Brandon
Kain with McCarthy Tétrault.
BC Appeal Court OKs Medical Marijuana in Tea,
Cookies
The BC Appeal Court has ruled the federal government's
restriction on allowing only dried marijuana to be used under
its medical access regulations is unconstitutional. Owen Smith,
who challenged the law, argued some patients want to consume
their marijuana medicine in butters, brownies, cookies and teas.
Smith claimed the right to administer the drug in other forms is
fundamental, but that was denied by federal government
regulations. Read The Globe and Mail article.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
There were no
amendments this month. |
LABOUR
& EMPLOYMENT |
Labour and Employment News:
Human Rights Tribunal Asks Complainant
to Pay Respondent's Legal Costs
On August 15, 2014, the BC Human Rights Tribunal (the
"Tribunal") released its decision in Ma
v. Dr. Iain G.M. Cleator and another, 2014 BCHRT 180
("Cleator"), where it ordered the complainant to pay a portion
of the respondent's costs. In doing so, the Tribunal sent a
strong message about its expectations for honesty and integrity
in its process. The complainant, Kim Ma, was a medical office
assistant to the respondent, Dr. Iain Cleator. After a couple of
years of employment, Ms. Ma took an extended maternity leave.
When she returned to the workplace, she found some significant
changes: the clinic was much busier, it had more staff, and new
office procedures had been put in place. Ms. Ma was resistant to
these changes and immediately had conflict with the new office
manager. Her employment was subsequently terminated by Dr.
Cleator about a month after she returned from her leave. Ms. Ma
brought a complaint to the Tribunal alleging that Dr. Cleator
discriminated against her on the basis of family status, sex
(pregnancy) and mental disability. After a lengthy ten-day
hearing, the Tribunal dismissed Ms. Ma's complaint in its
entirety, since it found that Ms. Ma had deliberately fabricated
the allegations against Dr. Cleator. Further, the Tribunal
concluded that she had lied under oath at the hearing and had
forged or altered documents that she presented as evidence. The
Tribunal found Ms. Ma's behaviour to be so egregious that it did
something uncommon: it ordered her to pay $5,000 towards Dr.
Cleator's legal fees. Read the full
article by Maggie Campbell with Davis LLP.
Failure to Mitigate Damages Leads to a
Reduction in Termination Notice
The Supreme
Court of British Columbia confirmed that following the
termination of a senior employee who had over 20 years of
service with the employer, the employee was entitled to a
reasonable notice period of 17 months considering the Bardal
factors. However, due to the employee's extremely passive
attitude towards finding new employment, the notice period was
reduced to 14 months. In a nutshell, the employee just did not
do enough to seek alternate employment.
What happened? This long-term
employee was 59 years old and worked as a senior financial
services manager in a company that sold cars to the public. His
duties included selling cars, and, after any sale was made in
the company, the client was directed to the employee's office to
complete the necessary papers and conclude the transaction. The
employee also offered customers automobile appearance protection
packages and a variety of leasing, insurance, warranty and
financing options for their new cars. Read the full
article by Christina Catenacci and published on the First
Reference Talks website.
New Annotations Posted to Pension Laws
The first of many annotations have now been posted to
pension-related laws. You can identify an annotated section by
looking at the annotation icon located on the far right side of
each section. For example, if you go to section 10 (1) (e) of the Pensions Benefits Standards Act, you
will see a star icon adjacent to the section. Click the star
icon to view the Expert annotation. To view all annotations
under an Act, click the "View Annotations for this Law" button
on the top menu bar.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
There were no
amendments this month. |
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT |
Local Government News:
Vancouver's New Building Bylaw
Unlike any other city or municipality in British Columbia, the
City of Vancouver is authorized by the Vancouver Charter to pass its own
building bylaws regulating the design and construction of
buildings as well as administrative provisions for permitting,
inspection and enforcement. On 1st April, 2014,
Vancouver City Council adopted the 2012 British Columbia
Building Code, with additional requirements and revisions
specific to Vancouver, to create the 2014 Vancouver Building
Bylaw (the "Vancouver Building Bylaw"). The Vancouver Building
Bylaw was originally scheduled to come into effect on 1st
July, 2014 but that date has been extended to 1st
January, 2015. The current 2007 Vancouver Building Bylaw will
remain in effect until that date. The Vancouver Building Bylaw
includes amendments to improve housing for seniors and people
with disabilities as well as amendments to promote the City's
objectives of the "Greenest City 2020 Action Plan". This
environmental action plan contains specific goals addressing
issues such as reducing carbon footprint, achieving zero waste
and preserving the City's ecosystems, which the City hopes to
achieve by 2020 to constitute the world's "greenest city". Read
the full
article by Karen
L. Weslowski with Miller Thomson LLP.
UBCM Session Examines Historic Land Title Decision
The Tsilhqot'in land title decision, and its impacts on local
governments, will be explored as part of a UBCM Convention
Plenary Session that features Chief Roger William along with
legal and government representatives. This Plenary Session will
take place September 23 from 1:45 – 3:00 p.m. at the
Whistler Conference Centre (Ballroom A). It will take the form
of a panel discussion, moderated by Councillor Murry Krause,
Chair of the UBCM First Nations Relations Committee. Chief Roger
William, Xeni Gwet'in First Nation, and Director, Cariboo
Regional District will provide an overview of the decision from
the Tsilhqot'in Nation's point of view. Legal, federal and
provincial representatives have also been invited to provide
their perspectives. This session will touch on a number of
topics and subject matter areas that affect local governments,
helping those in attendance understand how this decision will
affect their communities now, and in the future. Read
more on the UBCM website.
Leap in Gas Tax Funded Projects
The impact of the federal Gas Tax Fund on BC communities
continues to grow. Based on local government reporting, the
program provided funding for 676 infrastructure and planning
projects in 2013, 433 of which are new – a 20% increase as
compared to 2012. UBCM is preparing its 2013 Gas Tax Annual
Expenditure Report to be released next month. This report will
highlight the financial and project details for the 2013 Federal
Gas Tax Fund reporting year, as well as report on the cumulative
data for the nine-year Gas Tax Agreement. Read the UBCM
article.
Required E-Filing Deadline of August 31
for Some Local Governments
The Director of Land Titles of the Land Title and Survey
Authority of BC (LTSA) reminds local governments with
populations of 20,000 or over that as of August 31, 2014 they
are required to submit applications electronically to the Land
Title Office. Local governments are invited to join the Authorized
Subscriber Register (ASR) by registering eligible staff as
authorized subscribers. Authorized subscribers are authorized to
electronically sign certain applications that can then be
submitted to the Land Title Office using the Electronic Filing
System (EFS). The phased removal of temporary electronic filing
exemptions was originally announced on February 21, 2014 (read
announcement). Details on Required E-filing can be found
in the Director's
Requirements to File Land Title Forms Electronically.
Local government staff with questions about Required E-filing or
membership in the Authorized Subscriber Register should contact
the LTSA Customer Service Centre at 604-630-9630 or
1-877-577-LTSA (5872). To arrange complimentary EFS training,
contact the myLTSA Technical Support at 604-630-9630 or
1-877-577-LTSA (5872), press menu item 2. Source: BC
Land & Title Survey
New Local Government Annotations Posted
The first of many annotations have now been posted to local
government-related laws. You can identify an annotated section
by looking at the annotation icon located on the far right side
of each section. For example, if you go to section 26 (1) of the Community Charter, you will see a
star icon adjacent to the section. Click the star icon to view
the Expert annotation. To view all annotations under an Act,
click the "View Annotations for this Law" button on the top menu
bar. Expect to see many more annotations posted in the coming
weeks and months.
|
Act or Regulation
Affectedil |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
There were no
amendments this month. |
MISCELLANEOUS
|
Miscellaneous News:
Vancouver Aquarium Files Legal Challenge
to Whale, Dolphin Breeding Ban
The Vancouver Aquarium has filed a legal challenge seeking to
overturn a Vancouver Park Board resolution to ban the breeding
of whales and dolphins at the popular Stanley Park tourist
attraction. In a petition filed in BC Supreme Court, the
aquarium claims the board's decision falls outside its
jurisdiction as a municipal body. The aquarium says the
resolution interferes with its day-to-day operations. "We resent
being turned into a political football," said aquarium president
John Nightingale. The resolutions put forth by the park board
restrict the aquarium's ability to fully continue its mandate."
Read the
full article on CBCNews.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
There were no
amendments this month. |
MOTOR
VEHICLE & TRAFFIC |
Motor Vehicle and Traffic
News:
CVSE Sets up New Dispute Resolution Website
The dispute resolution process was developed in consultation
with industry stakeholders, CVSE staff and management, legal
service branch (LSB) and other governmental agencies. The
intention of the process is to ensure decisions are:
- legally and factually correct
- made with appropriate understanding of the relevant
policy factors
- made using processes that comply with the applicable
rules of natural justice or procedural fairness
- the person knows what is being considered and
- has an opportunity to present their version
- resolved in a timely manner with due consideration of all
circumstances
Visit the website
for more information.
Another Lawsuit Filed over Port Mann
"Slush Bomb" Incident
A third lawsuit has now been filed related to the slush bombs
that fell on drivers crossing the Port Mann Bridge in the
winter of 2012. According to a notice of civil claim filed in
New Westminster Supreme Court in August, Teresa De Jesus Faria
Macedo is suing Transportation Investment Corp. (TI Corp.),
the company that operates the Port Mann/Highway 1 project, and
three other companies involved in the construction of the
bridge, over the slush bomb incident on December 19, 2012.
Court documents state she was driving westbound attempting to
cross the bridge that day and was injured when ice and snow
plummeted on her windshield causing it to shatter. The impact
caused snow, ice and glass to cover parts of the inside of the
vehicle resulting in injury. Read more
on The Vancouver Sun website.
New Annotations Posted
The first of many annotations have now been posted to some of
the motor vehicle-related legislation. You can identify an
annotated section by looking at the annotation icon located on
the far right side of each section. For example, if you go to
section 98 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Act, you will
see a star icon adjacent to the section. Click the star icon
to view the Expert annotation. To view all annotations under
an Act click the "View Annotations for this Law" button on the
top menu bar.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
Motor Vehicle Fees Regulation
(334/91) |
Aug. 1/14 |
by
Reg 260/2013 |
Sept. 1/14 |
PROPERTY
& REAL ESTATE |
Property and Real Estate News:
The Difference a Day Can Make: When a
Strata Council Pulls Out the Rules
Governing and managing a strata property can be messy and
difficult. Strata owners are generally a disparate group with
little in common beyond ownership in the strata. From among this
group, a strata council must be elected, usually all volunteers
who, to one degree or another, are reluctant participants and
untrained in strata governance. Yet, it is the members of the
strata council who are often required to address the misconduct
of individual owners and make decisions about what may, or may
not, take place on strata property. What are they to do? In many
cases, listening to the competing sides in any strata dispute
and making common sense suggestions on route to a consensual
resolution of an issue will suffice. It is certainly the most
reasonable way to solve problems, provided everyone behaves
reasonably. But what if that is not possible? The short answer
is that the strata council has recourse to its bylaws and the
Strata Property Act to impose
solutions and compel appropriate behavior in the right
circumstances. In other words, they can pull out the rules and
use them to force a resolution of the particular issue. Read the
full
article by Peter
Roberts with Lawson Lundell LLP.
Real Estate Development Marketing Act
–
Amendments to Policy Statements
Changes to the Real Estate Development Marketing Act
("REDMA") came into force on May 29, 2014. The Superintendent of
Real Estate has introduced amendments to policy statements under
REDMA which are designed to complement the changes to REDMA.
Changes to the policy statements will require new forms of
Disclosure Statements to reflect changes to REDMA, including
clarification on construction commencement and completion dates
and disclosure of permitted uses in the zoning of the
development lands. The amendments will also clarify the
disclosure requirements when multiple building permits are
issued for one development. Read the full
article by Bradley
Cronquist with Pushor Mitchell LLP.
Installation of Electric Vehicle Charging
Stations on Strata Properties in BC
CHOA recently announced
the release of their recent report "Installation of Electric
Vehicle Charging Stations on Strata Properties in British
Columbia". This report, developed by the Condominium Home
Owners' Association (CHOA) in partnership with the Ministry of
Energy and Mines, identifies what a strata corporation or a
strata lot owner needs to know when considering the installation
of an electric vehicle charging station (EVCS) on strata
property. Click here
to download the report.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
There were no
amendments this month. |
WILLS
& ESTATES |
Wills and Estates News:
New Statutory Property Guardianship
Legislation and
Regulation Coming into Effect December 1, 2014
There are some significant changes coming into effect on
December 1, 2014 to British Columbia's adult guardianship
legislation. The changes will primarily [affect] both how the
Public Guardian and Trustee is appointed to manage the property
of persons who are considered to be incapable of managing their
financial affairs, and the rights of those persons. Currently,
the Public Guardian and Trustee may be appointed to manage the
financial affairs of a person who is incapable either through a
certificate under the Mental Health Act, or through a
court application under the Patients Property Act. Effective
December 1, 2014, the process by which the Public Guardian and
Trustee may be appointed by certificate under the Mental
Health Act will be replaced by provisions in Part 2.1 of the Adult Guardianship Act, and the
Statutory Property Guardianship Regulation. Read the full
article by Stan Rule on his blog Rule of Law.
Court Clarifies WESA Notice Requirement
Since BC's Wills, Estates and Succession Act
(WESA) and accompanying Supreme Court Probate Rules came into
force on March 31, we have been working with our counterparts in
the Probate Registry to clarify some of the new procedural
requirements. One of the things we have puzzled over, relating
to the timing of the beneficiary notice, has been clarified by a
recent court decision. Rule 25-2 requires notice of an intended
estate grant application in Form P1 to be sent to beneficiaries,
next of kin, and sometimes others, "at least 21 days before
submitting for filing" the application materials. When the
application materials are submitted, they must include an
affidavit of delivery in Form P9. This affidavit confirms that
the notice has been sent as required, but the prescribed form
does not require the person making the affidavit to say when
they sent the notice. Read the article
by Richard
Weiland with Clark Wilson.
New Wills and Estates Annotations Posted
The first of many annotations have now been posted to wills and
estates-related laws. You can identify an annotated section by
the annotation icon located on the far right side of each
section. For example, if you go to Appendix A.1 – Probate Forms –
Forms P1 to P10 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules (B.C. Reg.
168/2009) you will see a star icon adjacent to the section.
Click the star icon to view the Expert annotation. To view all
annotations under an Act, click the "View Annotations for this
Law" button on the top menu bar. Expect to see many more
annotations posted in the coming weeks and months.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective Date |
Amendment Information |
There were no
amendments this month. |
The
content
of this document is intended for client use only.
Redistribution to anyone other than Quickscribe clients
(without the prior written consent of Quickscribe) is strictly
prohibited.
QUICKSCRIBE SERVICES LTD.
UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS EMAIL SERVICE
To unsubscribe from this service, click here. |