April 27, 2016

Strata corporation’s counterclaim against owner-developer barred by Limitation Act

In Zaidi v The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 3464, 2016 BCSC 731, a recent decision on an application to dismiss a counterclaim and third-party notice, the BC Supreme Court considered the effect of a disclosure statement under the Real Estate Development Marketing Act in relation to the discoverability rules for limitation periods. The Read more

April 26, 2016

BC Human Rights Tribunal refuses to dismiss smoker’s discrimination complaint against strata corporation

In a decision made earlier this month, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal has refused to dismiss a complaint against a strata corporation that its blanket ban on smoking amounted to discrimination on the basis of a mental disability contrary to section 8 of the Human Rights Code. Background to the Read more

April 25, 2016

Common-Law Tests of Capacity Project featured on Common Law Radio

BCLI’s Common-Law Tests of Capacity Project was featured on a recent episode of Vancouver Co-op Radio’s program Common Law Radio. BCLI staff lawyer Kevin Zakreski appeared on the program to discuss the current law on mental capacity and the project’s recommendations for reform. The episode is available online on the Common Read more

April 18, 2016

Ontario court examines duty to repair and oppression remedy for strata properties

In Ryan v York Condominium Corporation No 340, 2016 ONSC 2470, Mr. Justice Perell of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice examined two pillars of strata-property law: the duty to repair and maintain the property and the remedy for oppressive actions or conduct. The case focussed on sections 89 (repair Read more

April 12, 2016

BC Supreme Court grants strata corporation wide-ranging order restraining strata-lot owners from engaging in further disruptive and abusive behaviour

The Owners, Strata Plan NW 1245 v Linden, 2016 BCSC 619, is another example of strata corporation going to court to obtain an order directing strata-lot owners to comply with bylaws or to refrain from disruptive behaviour. The case involved a 95-unit residential strata property located in Burnaby. The petitioner was Read more