COMPANY
& FINANCE |
Company and Finance News:
New Exempt Market Disclosure Obligations –
Impact on Investment Funds
The new harmonized Form 45-106F1 Report of Exempt
Distribution (the New Report) that came into effect on
June 30, 2016 imposes new disclosure obligations, including
specific requirements applicable only to investment funds. As previously discussed, on April 7, 2016,
the Canadian Securities Administrators (the CSA) announced amendments to National Instrument 45-106 Prospectus
Exemptions (NI 45-106) which introduce the New Report. As
was the case for the prior form of report, the New Report
applies to all types of public and private issuers in all
Canadian jurisdictions and, as a new requirement, is to be filed
electronically. Read the full article by Anne Ramsay and Laura Levine of Stikeman Elliott
LLP.
Tonn v. Sears Canada Inc: Dismissing Class
Certification with Instructions for Future
The recent British Columbia case of Tonn v. Sears Canada
Inc., 2016 BCSC 1081, is an example of a trend
in Canadian cases where courts are conditionally certifying
class proceedings despite a plaintiff's failure to define the
class as required or dismissing the application with substantial
guidance for re-application. In Tonn, a group of former
employees sought to certify a class action against Sears for
allegedly terminating their employment without proper severance.
In March 2013, Sears sold a division of its business to another
company. The majority of the employees in this division obtained
employment with the purchasing company and were not paid
severance by Sears. Within a year of the sale, the purchasing
company went out of business, which resulted in the termination
of employees' jobs. Read the full article by Alexandra Cocks and Leah Whitworth of McCarthy Tétrault
LLP and published on Lexology.
Canadian Securities Commissions Consider First Tactical
Private
Placement Under Canada's New Take-Over Bid Regime
Since Canada's new harmonized take-over bid regime (New Bid
Regime) came into effect earlier this year, there's been a lot
of talk about whether tactical private placements will become
the new poison pills. For more information on the New Bid Regime
see our previous article, Canada's New Take-Over Bid Rules Seek to
Level the Playing Field. A "tactical private
placement" occurs when a target company issues securities to a
friendly party in response to an unsolicited take-over bid in
order to make it more difficult and/or more expensive for the
hostile bidder to complete a take-over of the target company.
This outcome is particularly important to target companies under
the New Bid Regime for two key reasons. First, as a consequence
of the New Bid Regime, shareholders rights plans are largely
irrelevant in deterring hostile bids because such offers must
remain open for at least 105 days (rather than 35 days under the
old rules). Second, the New Bid Regime contains a mandatory
condition that a minimum of more than 50% of all outstanding
target securities owned or held by persons other than the bidder
and its joint actors be tendered and not withdrawn before the
bidder can take up any securities under the take-over bid. While
the Canadian securities regulators had considered the use of
private placements several times in the context of a take-over
bid, regulators had not, until the Dolly Varden hearing, had the
opportunity to respond to a claim by a bidder operating under
the New Bid Regime that a target company had used a private
placement as an inappropriate defensive tactic. Read the full article by David E. Woollcombe, Shane C. D'Souza and Heidi Gordon of McCarthy Tétrault
LLP.
BC Securities – Policies & Instruments
The following policies and instruments were published on the
BCSC website in the month of July:
- BCN
2016/06 – Notice of Approval – Proposed
Multilateral Instrument 91-101 Derivatives: Product
Determination and proposed Multilateral Instrument
96-101 Trade Repositories and Derivatives Data Reporting
and related documents
- 81-327 – CSA Staff Notice 31-327
– Next Steps in the CSA's Examination of Mutual Fund
Fees
- 45-319 – Multilateral CSA Notice
45-319 Amendments to Start-up Crowdfunding Registration
and Prospectus Exemptions
- 45-106
– Adoption of Amendments to National Instrument 45-106 Prospectus
Exemptions relating to Reports of Exempt Distribution
- 23-101
– Adoption of Amendments to the Order Protection Rule
– Amendments to National Instrument 23-101 Trading
Rules and Companion Policy 23-101CP to National
Instrument 23-101 Trading Rules
The amendments will come into force on July 6, 2016, except as
related to the market share threshold. The amendments related
to the market share threshold will come into force on October
1, 2016. The amendments address some of the inefficiencies and
costs that have resulted from implementing the order
protection rule (OPR). Further, the amendments add OPR-related
guidance to 23-101CP to address circumstances where a
marketplace has introduced an intentional order processing
delay.
- 51-514
– BC Instrument 51-514 Exemption from the
requirement to send financial statements and related
disclosure to securityholders during a disruption in postal
service
- 81-517
– BC Instrument 81-517 Exemption from the
requirement to send financial statements and related
disclosure to securityholders during a disruption in postal
service
- 45-320 – CSA Staff Notice 45-320
Exemptions for Certain Foreign Issuers from the Requirement
to Identify Purchasers as Registrants or Insiders in Reports
of Exempt Distribution
- 95-401 – CSA Consultation Paper
95-401 – Margin and Collateral Requirements for
Non-Centrally Cleared Derivatives
- 31-103 – CSA Notice – Notice
and Request for Comment on Proposed Amendments to National
Instrument 31-103 Registration Requirements, Exemptions
And Ongoing Registrant Obligations, National Instrument
33-109 Registration Information and to related
policies and forms.
- 51-346 – CSA Staff Notice 51-346 Continuous
Disclosure Review Program Activities for the fiscal year
ended March 31, 2016
- 11-331 – CSA Staff Notice 11-331 Extension
of Consultation Period Consultation Paper 33-404 Proposals
to Enhance the Obligations of Advisers, Dealers and
Representatives toward their Clients
In the attached notice, the CSA announces an extension to the
comment period for CSA Consultation Paper 33-404 Proposals
to Enhance the Obligations of Advisers, Dealers and
Representatives Toward their Clients. The comment period
will now end on September 30, 2016.
- BCN 2016/07 Specification of forms
required to be filed under Multilateral Instrument 96-101
– Trade Repositories and Derivatives Data Reporting
- 91-101
– Notice of Adoption – Multilateral Instrument
91-101 Derivatives: Product Determination and related
documents
- 96-101
– Notice of Adoption – Multilateral Instrument
96-101 Trade Repositories and Derivatives Data Reporting
and related documents
- 96-501
– Notice of adoption of BC Instrument 96-501–
Exemption from certain derivatives reporting requirements in
Multilateral Instrument 96-101 – Trade Repositories
and Derivatives Data Reporting
- 96-502
– Notice of adoption of BC Instrument 96-502 – BC
Instrument 96-502 – Exemption from derivatives reporting
requirements in Multilateral Instrument 96-101 – Trade
Repositories and Derivatives Data Reporting for certain
electricity-based derivatives
For more information visit the BC Securities website.
|
Act or
Regulation Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Designated Accommodation Area Tax Regulation (93/2013) |
Aug. 1/16 |
by Reg 100/2016 |
Income Tax (BC Family Bonus) Regulation (231/98) |
July 1/16 |
by Reg 114/2016 |
Multilateral Instrument 91-101 Derivatives: Product
Determination (202/2016) |
NEW
July 27/16 |
see Reg 202/2016 |
Multilateral Instrument 96-101 Trade Repositories and
Derivatives Data Reporting (203/2016) |
NEW
July 27/16 |
see Reg 203/2016 |
National Instrument 23-101 Trading Rules (252/2001) |
July 6/16 |
by Reg 163/2016 |
National Instrument 31-103 Registration Requirements,
Exemptions and Ongoing Registrant Obligations (226A/2009) |
July 15/16 |
by Reg 193/2013, as amended by Reg 238/2014 |
Prepaid Purchase Cards Regulation (292/2008) |
July 20/16 |
by Reg 185/2016 |
Provincial Sales Tax Act |
July 1/16 |
by 2016 Bill 14, c. 10, section 67 only (in force by Royal
Assent), Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2016 |
Special Accounts Appropriation and Control Act |
July 28/16 |
by 2016 Bill 28, c. 27, section 43 only (in force by Royal
Assent), Miscellaneous Statutes (Housing Priority
Initiatives) Amendment Act, 2016 |
ENERGY
& MINES |
Energy and Mines News:
AMEBC Issues News Release on
Transboundary Waters
The Association for Mineral Exploration issued a news release on
its website to address concerns about mineral exploration and
development projects and transboundary water quality concerns in
Northwest BC. Environmental and community. The news release
states:
AME is monitoring and strategically
engaging with our members, government and community
representatives about mineral exploration and development
projects and transboundary water quality concerns in Northwest
BC. Environmental and community concerns have been raised about
transboundary waters that originate in BC and flow into Alaska.
In particular, there are several rivers – Stikine, Unuk,
Tulsequah and Taku – that are considered transboundary, or
shared, waters. Both BC and Alaska recognize the importance and
care about these shared rivers that support salmon runs and
communities in both jurisdictions. As good neighbours and
allies, Canadian mineral explorers and developers understand and
respect these concerns. Northwest BC is one of the most
biophysically and culturally diverse areas, and importantly has
some of the most prospective and strategic mineral development
potential in Canada. This region attracts a significant portion
of the annual total mineral exploration and development
expenditures in BC. Recent developments include the Red Chris
Mine, the province's newest gold and copper mine. In addition
there are some very promising mineral exploration projects in
the region that have the potential to become operating mines,
pending positive investment decisions and extensive
environmental permitting processes.
Read the full news release by AMEBC.
Federal Approval for Site C Sparks Outrage
from
First Nations, Advocacy Groups
First Nations, landowners and environmental groups are accusing
Justin Trudeau of reneging on promises made during last year's
election campaign as the federal government quietly authorizes
construction to ramp up for a controversial hydroelectric dam
proposed for northeastern British Columbia. In a permitting
document issued without fanfare late Friday [August 1st]
before the August long weekend, the Department of Fisheries and
Oceans and Transport Canada authorized B.C.'s power utility to
move ahead with Site C. This includes building the actual
kilometre-long earthfill dam, along with the spillways, drainage
tunnels and generating stations and, ultimately, permission to
divert the Peace River and flood what will become an
83-kilometre reservoir. Site C is a $9-billion megaproject that
BC Hydro says will provide British Columbia with clean,
renewable electricity for more than a century starting in 2020,
though the proposal faces steadfast opposition from various
groups over its environmental impact and a lack of consultation.
"If this were the Harper government, I wouldn't be surprised at
all," said Ken Boon of the Peace Valley Landowner Association,
adding that he was both shocked and disappointed by the news.
Read The Vancouver Sun article.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Direction No. 7 to the British Columbia Utilities
Commission (28/2014) |
July 20/16 |
by Reg 197/2016 |
July 28/16 |
by Reg 207/2016 |
Petroleum and Natural Gas Act |
Aug. 1/16 |
by 2014 Bill 12, c. 10, sections 19 to 24, 26 to 29, 31 to 36,
37 (a) (part), (b), 38 only (in force by Reg 198/2016), Natural Gas Development Statutes Amendment Act,
2014 |
Petroleum and Natural Gas Act Fee, Rental and Work Requirement
Regulation (378/82) |
Aug. 1/16 |
by Reg 198/2016 |
Petroleum and Natural Gas Drilling Licence and Lease Regulation
(10/82)
(formerly titled Petroleum and Natural Gas Drilling Licence
Regulation) |
Aug. 1/16 |
by Reg 198/2016 |
Petroleum and Natural Gas Royalty and Freehold Production Tax
Regulation (495/92) |
July 20/16 |
by Reg 192/2016 |
Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel Requirements Regulation (394/2008) |
July 20/16 |
by Reg 190/2016 |
Silversmith Exemption Regulation (204/2016) |
NEW
July 28/16 |
see Reg 204/2016 |
FAMILY
& CHILDREN |
Family and Children
News:
Social Media Evidence in Family Law
Proceedings
from CLEBC website – Practice Points
This paper, authored by Master Heather M. MacNaughton, Supreme
Court of British Columbia, provides an overview of the role of
social media in family law cases and includes cautionary notes
and consequences to introducing social media into evidence.
Click here to view a PDF version of the paper
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Child Care Licensing Regulation (332/2007) |
July 19/16 |
by Reg 178/2016 |
Community Care and Assisted Living Regulation (217/2004) |
July 19/16 |
by Reg 178/2016 |
Residential Care Regulation (96/2009) |
July 19/16 |
by Reg 178/2016 |
Supreme Court Civil Rules (168/2009) |
July 1/16 |
by Reg 3/2016 |
Supreme Court Family Rules (169/2009) |
July 1/16 |
by Reg 4/2016 |
FOREST
& ENVIRONMENT |
Forest and Environment News:
Proposed Changes to BC's Contaminated Sites Legal
Regime
The B.C. Ministry of the Environment (the "ministry") plans to
update some aspects of B.C.'s contaminated sites legal regime
under the Environmental Management Act (the
"Act") and its Regulations. The ministry has issued two
intentions papers, outlining the ministry's new approach to
the identification of contaminated sites and the prevention of
contamination from soil relocation. This alert highlights the
proposed changes in those papers and outlines the process by
which interested stakeholders can provide feedback.
Identification of Contaminated Sites
Issues with current regime
The paper outlined three major weaknesses with the current
site profile regime. First, the existing regime is overly
conservative. Land parcels will often be brought into the site
profile process when proponents undertake activities that will
not change land use. The existing triggers, therefore, are too
broad. Second, in order to offset these unnecessary triggers,
the ministry has had to add additional release mechanisms to
the Act. This complicates the site profile process and makes
application confusing. It also requires significant ministry
resources to administer. Finally, there are currently other
mechanisms in place which make 100% coverage by the Act
unnecessary. For example, the ministry may find out about
contaminated sites through Notification of Independent
Remediation (NIR), Notification of Likely or Actual Offsite
Migration (NOM), complaints, spill reports, emergency
response, and service applications.
Read the full article by Luke Dineley of Borden Ladner Gervais
LLP.
Environmental Appeal Board Decisions
There was one Environmental Appeal Board decisions released in
the month of June:
Water Act
Wildlife Act
Visit the Environmental Appeal Board website for more information.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Allowable Annual Cut Administration Regulation (69/2009) |
July 19/16 |
by Reg 181/2016 |
Carbon Tax Act |
Aug. 1/16 |
by 2016 Bill 14, c. 10, sections 3 to 6 only (in force by Reg 180/2016), Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2016 |
Carbon Tax Regulation (125/2008) |
Aug. 1/16 |
by Reg 180/2016 |
Closed Areas Regulation (76/84) |
July 1/16 |
by Reg 130/2016 |
Contaminated Sites Regulation (375/96) |
July 19/16 |
by Reg 184/2016 |
Environmental Management Act |
July 19/16 |
by 2004 Bill 13, c. 18, section 3 (b) only (in force by Reg 179/2016), Environmental Management Amendment Act, 2004 |
Guiding Territory Certificate Regulation (115/2015) |
July 5/16 |
by Reg 167/2016 |
Hazardous Waste Regulation (63/88) |
July 19/16 |
by Reg 179/2016 |
Hunting Regulation (190/84) |
July 1/16 |
by Reg 130/2016 |
July 22/16 |
by Reg 200/2016 |
Integrated Pest Management Regulation (604/2004 |
July 1/16 |
by Regs 234/2015 and 235/2015 |
Motor Vehicle Prohibition Regulation (196/99) |
July 1/16 |
by Reg 130/2016 |
Public Access Prohibition Regulation (187/2003) |
July 1/16 |
by Reg 130/2016 |
Organic Matter Recycling Regulation (18/2002) |
July 19/16 |
by Reg 179/2016 |
Surrender Regulation (181/2016) |
NEW
July 19/16 |
see Reg 181/2016 |
Wildlife Act Commercial Activities Regulation (338/82) |
July 1/16 |
by Reg 130/2016 |
Wildlife Management Areas Regulation (12/2015) |
July 11/16 |
by Reg 177/2016 |
Woodlot Licence Regulation (68/2006) |
July 19/16 |
by Reg 181/2016 |
HEALTH |
BC to Stop Charging Welfare Recipients for Methadone
Treatment
Facing a class action suit, province will stop
$18.34-a-month
deductions from social assistance cheques
Faced with a potential class-action lawsuit, the B.C. government
has ended its practice of deducting money from the welfare
cheques of recovering addicts receiving treatment from private
methadone-dispensing clinics. Legal documents received by the
plaintiff's lawyer from the provincial government indicate the
Ministry of Social Development has changed its policy and,
beginning next week, will pay any additional clinic fees for
affected clients on income or disability assistance. It's the
latest development in a legal challenge launched last November
aimed at stopping the government from allowing private clinics
to take $18.34 from clients' social-assistance cheques in
exchange for methadone treatment, as well as compensating those
already affected by the policy. "The government's change of
heart is [its] way of acceding to the inevitable," said Jason
Gratl, lawyer for the proposed representative plaintiff. "In the
future, the $18.34 will remain in the pockets of the most
desperate, the most disadvantaged in our province" Gratl said.
Read the CBC article.
|
Act or
Regulation Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Health Care Employers Regulation (427/94) |
Jul 20/16 |
by Regs 193/2016 and 195/2016 |
Nurses (Registered) and Nurse Practitioners Regulation
(284/2008) |
July 26/16 |
by Reg 201/2016 |
Pharmacists Regulation (417/2008) |
July 26/16 |
by Reg 201/2016 |
LABOUR
& EMPLOYMENT |
Labour and Employment News:
The Right to Be Wrong: Supreme Court of Canada Lowers
the
Causation Bar on Occupational Disease and Injury
On June 24, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada provided
considerable latitude to decision makers regarding
occupational disease and injury in British Columbia (Workers' Compensation
Appeal Tribunal) v. Fraser Health Authority ("Fraser
Health"). Fraser Health concerned three
technicians at a hospital laboratory who were diagnosed with
breast cancer. The workers made a claim under the B.C. Workers Compensation Act on the
basis that their cancer was an occupational disease. During
the process, WorkSafeBC considered three expert reports. One
report was prepared by the Occupational Health and Safety
Agency for Health Care in British Columbia regarding the
incidence of cancer in the laboratory where the workers were
employed. The other two reports were prepared by doctors
specializing in occupational medicine. Each of the reports'
conclusions were substantially similar: the experts were
unable to conclude there was a definitive link between the
technicians' jobs and their disease. As a result, WorkSafeBC
denied the claims. The technicians appealed to the Workers'
Compensation Appeal Tribunal ("WCAT") and were successful.
WCAT found that while the expert reports could not
conclusively link the workers' cancer to their jobs, this
would not preclude a successful claim. Compensation for
occupational diseases requires the application of a lower
standard than scientific certainty: as long as there is some
"positive evidence" to suggest a link between a worker's
disease and his or her employment, this is sufficient.
Applying that principle to the facts, WCAT noted two kinds of
positive evidence: Read the full article by Eric Ito of Miller Thomson LLP.
Supreme Court of Canada Confirms Federally-Regulated
Employees
Cannot be Terminated without Cause under the Canada
Labour Code
On July 14, 2016, in a highly anticipated ruling, the Supreme
Court of Canada ruled in Wilson v Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.
that Division XIV of the Canada Labour Code prevents
federally-regulated employers from terminating non-managerial
employees with more than 12 months of service without reasons.
The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Code
confirms that the Code overrides the long-established
common law principle that an employer may generally terminate
the employment of a non-unionized employee at any time, for
any reason, by providing the employee with reasonable notice
of termination of employment. This conclusion is consistent
with the past interpretations of many labour arbitrators and
adjudicators. Read the full article by Dana F. Hooker and Ryan Campbell of DLA
Piper LLP.
The Potential Class Action: British Columbia Supreme
Court Keeps
Door Open to Certification of Wrongful Dismissal Claim
In Tonn v Sears Canada Inc. the British Columbia
Supreme Court rejected a plaintiff's attempt to certify a
class action for wrongful dismissal under the Class Proceedings Act ("CPA").
However, this was not the end of the road for the plaintiff,
as the court provided him with significant guidance towards
trying again. Read the full article by Dana F. Hooker of DLA Piper LLP.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Employment Standards Regulation (396/95) |
July 20/16 |
by Reg 188/2016 |
Public Sector Employers Act |
July 6/16 |
by Reg 173/2016 |
Social Services Employers Regulation (84/2003) |
July 20/16 |
by Reg 194/2016 |
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT |
Local Government News:
Identification of Contaminated Sites – Changes
in
Store for Local Governments
The Ministry of Environment has extended the period for
stakeholder comments on its Intentions Paper regarding Identification of
Contaminated Sites. Comments should be directed to margaret_shaw@shaw.ca. Local governments
and approving officers, including those who have opted out of
the contaminated sites identification process under existing
legislation, are encouraged to review the Intentions Paper if
they have not already done so, to see whether the proposed
changes to the site profiles regime warrant comment on their
behalf. From a local government perspective the following
changes seem particularly significant:
- Local governments and approving officers will no longer be
able to opt out of the site identification process
- Subdivision, soil removal, and demolition permit
applications will no longer trigger contaminated site
identification
- Building permit applications will trigger contaminated site
identification
- Zoning amendment, development permit and development
variance permit application triggers for contaminated site
identification will remain in place
- Compliance with remediation requirements resulting from
contaminated site identification will be policed by local
governments at the final building inspection or occupancy
permit stage of redevelopment
Read the full article by Bill Buholzer of Young Anderson Barristers
and Solicitors.
Court Orders End to Homeless Encampment
On July 5, 2016, the Honourable Chief Justice Hinkson released
his decision in British Columbia v. Adamson, 2016 BCSC
1245, following a renewed application by the Province for an
interim injunction to end the "Tent City" encampment beside the
Victoria Courthouse. Chief Justice Hinkson found in favour of
the Province, ordering the dismantling of the encampment to
coincide with the availability of additional shelter options for
the campers.
Background
Beginning in the fall of 2015, several members of the homeless
community in Victoria began setting up tents on an area of lawn
on the eastern side of the Courthouse property. This land
belongs to the Province and is not subject to the City of
Victoria's bylaws that allow homeless persons to take overnight
shelter in City parks, nor are there any provincial enactments
that apply to prohibit camping on the land.
Read the full article by Marie Watmough of Stewart
McDannold Stuart LLP.
Report on Agriculture's Connection to Health
– from UBCM website
The Provincial Health Services Authority has released a new report on agriculture's connection to
health, together with resources that highlight potential roles
for local governments in supporting health through
evidence-based planning. The report details connections between
agriculture and health, and addresses:
- Local food safety and nutrition;
- Agriculture in public settings (e.g. farm-to-institution
initiatives);
- Food self-sufficiency;
- Agriculture and water quality; and
- Agriculture and climate change.
Read the UBCM article.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and Procedure
Regulation (171/2002) |
July 11/16 |
by Reg 176/2016 |
Gaming Control Regulation (208/2002) |
July 19/16 |
by Reg 182/2016 |
Municipal Replotting Act |
STATUTE
REVISION
July 20/16 |
c. 1 [RSBC 2016], whole Act in force by Reg 196/2016 |
Vancouver Charter |
July 28/16 |
by 2016 Bill 28, c. 27, section 1 only (in force by Royal
Assent), Miscellaneous Statutes (Housing Priority
Initiatives) Amendment Act, 2016 |
UBC Tall Wood Building Regulation (182/2015) |
July 29/16 |
by Reg 208/2016 |
MISCELLANEOUS
|
Miscellaneous News:
Trans Activist Says Humans Rights Code
Amendment Will Go Far
Province recently moved to amend B.C.'s Human Rights Code
to explicitly protect gender identity or expression
A Vancouver trans activist says new legislation introduced in
B.C. to amend the province's Human Rights Code to explicitly
protect gender identity or expression will go far in educating
people and institutions. "Pretty soon, in a few years, everybody
who's gone through school will have learned about gender
identity and gender expression because that will have been
taught as part of the Human Rights Code," said Morgane
Oger, who chairs the Trans Alliance Society and sits on the B.C.
NDP executive. The B.C. Liberals introduced the legislation in
the B.C. legislature on July 25, days before the Pride
festivities kicked off in Vancouver. Vancouver-West End New
Democrat MLA Spencer Chandra Herbert, who tried to have
protection for gender identity added to the B.C. Human
Rights Code for several years, previously told CBC News he plans to
support the government legislation. Read the CBC article.
TRU Law Students Challenged to Create next Uber
By joining the ranks of cutting-edge thinkers considering the
future of the legal profession, Thompson Rivers University Law
School (TRU) in Kamloops, BC hopes to offer its students an
advantage in the volatile world they'll enter as new lawyers.
Lawyering in the 21st century, a third year elective
course taught by Assistant Professor Katie Sykes, seems likely
to do just that. After studying law at the University of
Toronto, Harvard, and Dalhousie, clerking at the Supreme Court
of Canada, and working in New York for a large international law
firm, Professor Sykes recognized the need to prepare students
better for practice in today's fast-changing society. The goal
of Lawyering
in the 21st century is to help students develop the
necessary vision and skills to anticipate and adapt to change. Professor Sykes says, "The students are at
the cusp of change. They know their future in the practice of
law involves uncertainties. They seem relieved to discuss the
challenges they face openly, to confront them and identify the
opportunities they create." Read the full article published on the Provincial Court
of British Columbia website.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Civil Resolution Tribunal Act |
July 13/16 |
by 2012 Bill 44, c. 25, sections 1 to 61, 79 to 82, 85, 86 (1)
and (3), 88 to 92 and 111 only (in force by Reg 171/2016), Civil Resolution Tribunal Act, as amended
by 2015 Bill 19, c. 16, sections 1 (a), (b) (part), (c) to (f),
(g) (part), 2, 3 (part), 4 to 6, 7 (part), 8 (part), 9, 10 (a),
(b) (part), (c) (part), 11, 13 to 17, 18 (part), 20 to 23, 25, 26,
27 (part) 28, 29, 31, 32 (part), 33 to 37, 38 (part), 39 only (in
force by Reg 171/2016), Civil Resolution Tribunal Amendment Act, 2015 |
July 28/16 |
by 2015 Bill 19, c. 16, section 3 (part) only (in force by Reg 206/2016), Civil Resolution Tribunal Amendment Act, 2015,
as amended by 2015 Bill 40, c. 40, section 57 only (in force by Reg 172/2016), Natural Gas Development Statutes Amendment Act,
2015 |
Coroners Regulation (298/2007) |
July 20/16 |
by Reg 187/2016 |
Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act |
July 11/16 |
by Reg 174/2016 |
July 13/16 |
by 2012 Bill 44, c. 25, section 94 only (in force by Reg 171/2016), Civil Resolution Tribunal Act |
Human Rights Code |
July 28/16 |
by 2016 Bill 27, c. , sections 1 to 6 only (in force by Royal
Assent), Human Rights Code Amendment Act, 2016 |
Special Municipal Constables Complaints Regulation (46/2016) |
NEW
Aug. 1/16 |
see Reg 46/2016 |
MOTOR
VEHICLE & TRAFFIC |
Motor Vehicle and Traffic
News:
Report of Another ICBC Rate Hike
Causes Ruckus in Legislature
Drivers in B.C. will soon see an increase in their car
insurance rates, according to transport minister Todd Stone.
During an interview on Radio NL in Kamloops on Wednesday [July
29th], Stone said ICBC can seek an increase of
between four and seven per cent to basic insurance rates, which
is within the rate-smoothing framework. The last rate increase
was 5.5 per cent. "We're going to do everything that we possibly
can to apply as much downward pressure on rates so that we're
closer to four per cent versus a higher number. But look, the
pressures on rates at ICBC is significant," Stone told the
station. The corporation will submit its application for a basic
insurance rate increase to the B.C. Utilities Commission by Aug.
31. ICBC won't divulge how much rates will be increased until
then. The rate hike kicked off a firestorm in Question Period
this week, with the Opposition accusing the minister of turning
ICBC into a government "slush fund" because the corporation is
projected to transfer $150 million in dividends per year for the
next three years to the government. Read The Vancouver Sun
article.
CVSE Bulletins & Notices
A number of important bulletins and notices have been posted by
CVSE in July. These include:
- Circular 04-16 Fender-less Vehicle
Regulation – This purpose of the circular is to advise
that on July 4, 2016, by Order in Council (OIC) 1004/58, amendments to Motor Vehicle Act Regulation (MVAR) Division
7.01 were enacted to allow for 1940 and earlier model
year vehicles to operate on highway without fenders, mudguards
or mudflaps as required by MVAR Division 7.06 under specific
conditions.
- VI Notice 04-16 Amendment of Vehicle
Fender / Mudflap Vehicle Inspection Criteria
For more information on these and other items, visit the CVSE
website.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Commercial Transport Regulation (30/78) |
July 28/16 |
by Reg 205/2016 |
Container Trucking Regulation (248/2014) |
July 20/16 |
by Reg 186/2016 |
Motor Fuel Tax Act |
Aug. 1/16 |
by 2016 Bill 14, c. 10, sections 34 to 50 only (in force by Reg 180/2016), Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2016 |
Motor Fuel Tax Regulation (125/2008) |
Aug. 1/16 |
by Reg 180/2016 |
Motor Vehicle Act Regulations (26/58) |
July 4/16 |
by Reg 164/2016 |
Violation Ticket Administration and Fines Regulation
(89/97) |
July 5/16 |
by Reg 167/2016 |
July 22/16 |
by Reg 200/2016 |
PROPERTY
& REAL ESTATE |
Property and Real Estate
News:
New Rules on Terminating Strata in Force
New rules on terminating a strata came into force on 28 July
2016. At that time, order in council 592/2016 was adopted. The order in council
brought into force the termination provisions of Bill 40, Natural Gas Development Statutes Amendment
Act, 2015. These provisions amended part 16 of the Strata Property Act, which deals
with cancelling a strata plan and winding up a strata
corporation. OIC 592/2016 also contained changes to the Strata Property Regulation and the Bare Land Strata Plan Cancellation Regulation.
The most noteworthy change in the new legislation is the
lowering of the voting threshold to authorize termination. That
threshold previously required a unanimous resolution. Now, it
requires a resolution passed by an 80 percent vote. To protect
the interests of any dissenting owners, the legislation also
requires that the strata corporation apply to the supreme court
after a termination resolution has been passed, to obtain an
order confirming that the decision to terminate is in the best
interests of the owners and is not significantly unfair to an
owner, a registered charge holder, or a creditor. Read the full article by the BCLI.
New Penalties for Property Transfer Tax Avoidance
– FICOM
(Industry News Alert)
The Superintendent of Real Estate is warning developers that
under new Property Transfer Tax legislation
they face significant fines and/or imprisonment if they provide
incorrect information intended to avoid the tax changes. The
Province is introducing and will be enforcing stringent
non-compliance penalties. Under the legislation, any individual
who fails to pay the additional tax, or who participates in
providing incorrect information to avoid the tax could be liable
for fines of up to $100,000 and/or two years in prison. The
legislation introduced by government earlier this week provides
for an additional Property Transfer Tax of 15% effective August
2, 2016, on residential property transfers to foreign entities
in the Greater Vancouver Regional District. Read the full FICOM
alert bulletin.
BC Tenant Laws Need Overhaul to
Protect Renters, say Advocates
Officials with TRAC say there are currently too many loopholes
allowing landlords to raise rents substantially at the end of a
lease, and not enough recourse for renters who get kicked out so
landlords can list their units on sharing sites like Airbnb. A report
released by Vancity yesterday found that renting is no
longer a viable alternative to home ownership for working
millennials in Vancouver. Jane Mayfield, acting executive
director of TRAC, spoke with host Rick Cluff on the CBC's The
Early Edition [recently].
Rick Cluff: We're hearing stories where landlords
are saying "every time you sign a lease we're considering you
a new renter, which allows us to put the rent up." Is that
legal?
Jane Mayfield: We're hearing a lot of that lately. It's a
bit of a grey area. The legislation and policy isn't quite
clear, because it is true that rent can be set at any amount
for a new tenant.
Read the CBC article.
The Report of the Independent Advisory Group on the
Real Estate Industry in BC
On June 28, 2016, the Independent Advisory Group ("IAG") issued
its Report on the conduct and practices in the Real Estate
Industry in BC. The IAG investigated the real estate industry
and the existing regulatory regime, in the context of the
current extra-ordinary real estate market and reports of
inappropriate practices. The Province announced that it will end
the industry self-regulation in the real estate industry and
overhaul governance, oversight, transparency and accountability
of the sector. The Province accepted the recommendations of the
IAG and announced it will:
- Establish a dedicated superintendent of real estate, who
will take over the Real Estate Council's regulation and
rule-making authority to carry out the changes required to
restore public confidence.
- Reconstitute the Real Estate Council with a majority of
public-interest, non-industry members.
- Implement the recommended penalties, as well as increased
fines for unlicensed activity and other offences.
Allow for commissions from licensees engaging in misconduct to
be taken back to the council.
- Make the managing broker responsible for ensuring the owner
of the brokerage does not engage in the business of the
brokerage if the owner is not a licensee.
No longer permit licensees to offer dual agency representation.
The IAG Report made 28 recommendations with right to regulatory
changes, which have been accepted by the Provincial Government.
Read the full article by Edward Wilson of Lawson Lundell LLP.
BC Property Law Vulnerable to Challenge, says Prominent
Lawyer
A prominent lawyer on constitutional and tax law is planning to
challenge B.C.'s new tax on foreign homebuyers. "There's a huge
problem with this legislation," Toronto lawyer Rocco Galati said
Thursday [July 28th]. "It's clearly offensive on its
face." Galati, a former tax specialist in the federal Department
of Justice, has developed a public profile on cases such as the
successful challenge of the former Conservative government's
appointment of Marc Nadon to the Supreme Court of Canada. Galati
expects to be supplied clients for a test case by Vancouver
immigration lawyer Larry Wong, who said B.C.'s 15-per-cent
foreign buyers' tax comes from the same mindset that has fuelled
Donald Trump's drive for the presidency. "The new normal is the
Donald Trump new normal of taking action according to one's
feelings – 'Oh, these foreigners, their money is not
clean,' based on their feeling that, 'How could one make so much
money or pay for such overvalued real estate?'" Wong said. "I
think the tax shows disrespect. Foreign buyers who buy Vancouver
properties are not criminals." Galati said the law is a
violation of section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,
which prohibits discrimination on the basis of, among other
things, national origin. In most instances, Canadian
jurisprudence supports the requirement that foreign nationals be
treated the same as Canadian citizens and permanent residents
when they are in Canada, he said. Read The Vancouver Sun
article.
|
Act or Regulation
Affected |
Effective
Date |
Amendment Information |
Bare Land Strata Plan Cancellation Regulation (556/82) |
July 28/16 |
by Reg 206/2016 |
Homeowner Protection Act Regulation (29/99) |
July 3/16 |
by Reg 33/2015 |
Strata Property Act |
July
13/16 |
by 2012 Bill 44, c. 25, sections 95 to 105 only (in force by Reg 171/2016), Civil Resolution Tribunal Act |
by 2015 Bill 19, c. 16, sections 45 to 49 only (in force by Reg 171/2016), Civil Resolution Tribunal Amendment Act, 2015 |
July 28/16 |
by 2015 Bill 40, c. 40, sections 37 to 43, 45 and 47 to 54 only
(in force by Reg 206/2016), Natural Gas Development Statutes Amendment Act,
2015 |
Strata Property Regulation (43/2000) |
July 13/16 |
by Reg 172/2016 |
July 28/16 |
by Reg 206/2016 |
WILLS
& ESTATES |
Wills and Estates News:
BC Court of Appeal Clarifies Rights of
Joint Accountholders
Can one owner of a joint bank account withdraw all of the funds
for their own purposes? Does the other joint accountholder have
any right to claim against the withdrawn funds? The British
Columbia Court of Appeal tackled such questions, as well as many
others, in the recent decision of Zeligs Estate v. Janes, released on
29 June 2016. This case involved a house on the University of
British Columbia Endowment Lands owned by Mrs. Burnett and her
daughter Diana as joint tenants. In 2010, when Mrs. Burnett was
102 years old and living in a care facility, Diana used her
authority as co-owner and as Mrs. Burnett's attorney (pursuant
to an enduring power of attorney) to sell the UBC house for $2.7
million. Mrs. Burnett was mentally incapable at the time. Diana
deposited the net sale proceeds into a bank account at CIBC,
held in the joint names of herself and Mrs. Burnett. Within a
few weeks, Diana withdrew the entire sum for her own purposes.
Mrs. Burnett died later that year, leaving a will that divided
her estate equally between her daughters Diana and Barbara.
Diana, as executor, took the position that the sale proceeds
from the UBC house belonged to her by right of survivorship, and
did not form part of the estate. According to Diana, all that
remained in the estate was a balance of $126,000. She sent
Barbara a cheque for $63,000. Read the full article by Kerwin, Scott of Borden
Ladner Gervais LLP.
Marley v. Rawlings
– by Stan Rule
As I wrote in my most recent post, Fuchs v. Fuchs,
I am looking at cases in other jurisdictions dealing with
rectification of wills for a paper I am working on. I am not
aware of any cases in British Columbia interpreting our new
provision allowing for rectification of a will, section 59 of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act.
Accordingly, I am looking elsewhere. Fuchs is an Alberta
case. England has had legislation permitting rectification of
wills for longer than either Alberta or British Columbia.
Section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act, 1982,
c. 53 is similar, but section 20 (1) is worded somewhat more
narrowly than section 59 (1) of the WESA. Section 20 (1)
provides:
(1) |
If a court is satisfied that a will is so
expressed that it fails to carry out the testator's
intentions, in consequence – |
|
(a) |
of a clerical error; or |
|
(b) |
of a failure to understand his instructions, |
|
it may order that the will shall be
rectified so as to carry out his intentions. |
Read the full article by Stan Rule of Sabey Rule LLP.
|
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. |