The first draft of the 5th edition is currently out for review with pension experts. BCLI will consider their comments and make edits to the draft over the summer.

The completed 5th edition is expected to be published Fall 2025.

For more details on the project, please visit the project webpage.

The post Project Update: Pension Division Q+A 5th Edition first appeared on British Columbia Law Institute.

Changes to part 6 of the Family Law Act included clarifying and modernizing law on: locked-in retirement accounts and life income funds; private annuities; assignment of survivor benefits; calculation of commuted value; and, administrator fees.

Further, changes to the Division of Pensions Regulation included: requiring the plan administrator to annually notify a limited member who has not yet received benefits of the earliest date of the limited member’s pension eligibility; raising the maximum administrative fee for registering the spouse as a limited member of the plan and for transferring a proportionate share of the member’s defined contribution account to the credit of the spouse; revising forms P1-4 and P6-9; and, repealing form P5.

BCLI has continued its commitment to improving family law in BC through its Pension Division Questions and Answers series. The Q+A is a definitive guide on navigating the complex legal issues that arise when a spousal relationship breaks down and the family property to be divided includes benefits in a pension plan.

On December 19, 2024, the BCLI staff and volunteer editors met to discuss the 5^th edition of Pension Division Q+A. At the meeting, the group determined that potential areas for review included:

• case law;
• terminology;
• annuities;
• prescribed forms;
• administrative fees;
• Family Law Act amendments;
• references to Rutherford v Rutherford (1981 CanLII 726 (BCCA), 127 DLR (3d) 658), a leading case prior to B.C. enacting pension-division legislation;
• industry developments; and,
• locked-in retirement accounts and life income funds.

The 5^th edition Q+A will be an important guide for navigating recent legislative changes, new case law, and evolving pensions practice.

Quick links:

• Bill 17, Family Law Amendment Act, 2023 (first reading)
• Report on Pension Division: A Review of Part 6 of the Family Law Act (PDF)
• Pension Division Questions and Answers 5^th Edition Webpage
• BCLI Blog “BCLI Pension Division Report Recommendations Implemented”
• BCLI Blog “BCLI welcomes pensions division reforms”

The post Pension division reform and fifth edition Q+A updates first appeared on British Columbia Law Institute.

More information on the Renovate the Public Hearing Project is available on the BCLI website.

The post First Draft of the Renovate the Public Hearing Project Final Report Discussed first appeared on British Columbia Law Institute.

The BCLI’s Reconciliation Primers highlight how legal pluralism underpins meaningful implementation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). It can support the application and prioritization of separate and shared legal authorities. As noted in Legal Pluralism: Indigenous Legal Orders & Canadian State Law, the Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families (the Act) presents a helpful example for how legislation can create a framework for coordinating the application of different Indigenous legal orders and state laws.

In assessing the constitutionality of the Act, the Supreme Court of Canada applied a legal pluralist analysis.[1] The Court’s analysis draws out some of the layers of legal pluralism within the Act. It is helpful to understanding the relationships between different legal norms within the legislation and Parliament’s vision for building and maintaining respectful relationships between distinct legal orders.

The Court articulated some of the ways in which the legislation brings together three different legal norms: Indigenous laws, Canadian Crown laws, and international legal standards. These norms are reflected in the process leading up to development of the Act, the text of the Act, its purpose, and the space it creates for developing legislation and government-to-government arrangements moving forward.

As the Court noted, these distinct legal norms are not stand alone elements within the legislation. They are interwoven and mutually reinforcing. For example, the purpose of the Act has three interwoven elements which support the overarching purpose of protecting the well-being of Indigenous children, youth and families. The interwoven elements of the purpose are an affirmation of inherent Indigenous jurisdiction in relation to child and family services, legislative provisions enacted by Parliament to establish national standards, and international standards as articulated in UNDRIP. The Court helpfully provides examples of how these distinct elements are mutually reinforcing:

Affirming the legislative authority of Indigenous groups, communities and peoples and adopting national standards were viewed as an integral part of implementing aspects of the UNDRIP. Similarly, the affirmation of Indigenous legislative authority was also seen to sit comfortably alongside the national standards articulated by Parliament, because Indigenous communities had been participants in formulating the standards and were expected to be participants in implementing them thereafter.[2]

As the BCLI has noted in the Reconciliation Primers, there are various ways state law can facilitate respectful relationships between distinct legal norms in a manner consistent with UNDRIP. Further, the effect of creating space for the exercise of jurisdiction by Indigenous Peoples and communities, is to invite further weaving together of Indigenous, national and international law to protect the well-being of Indigenous children, youth and families.[3]

In affirming Parliament’s openness to a legally plural framework for reconciliation, the Act and the Court’s decision help shed some insight on a path forward in the area of child and family well-being. The shift this legislation represents towards respect for Indigenous legal orders on par with federal state law is a welcome shift in the Canadian legal framework.

[1] See Reference re An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families, 2024 SCC 5.

[2] Supra note 1 at para. 53.

[3] Supra note 1 at para. 134.

The post Legal Pluralism and the SCC’s decision in Reference re An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families first appeared on British Columbia Law Institute.

We note that the province has just adopted Bill 44, a new law that limits the use of public hearings. In this consultation, we hope to hear from all members of the public, and look forward to receiving comments that will assist the BCLI Renovate the Public Hearing Project Committee in developing its final recommendations for reform.

Public hearings have been a feature of BC’s land-use legislation for local governments for about 100 years. Recently, critics have questioned whether public hearings are serving the purpose of providing a deliberative forum to assist local governments in making decisions on land-use planning. The Renovate the Public Hearing Project provides an opportunity to think about public engagement on land use from first principles, consider new insights into group deliberation, and create a better way for local governments to engage the public.

Copies of the consultation paper, a short backgrounder summarizing its contents, and a link to our survey are all available at the project webpage. The consultation is open until 15 March 2024.

The post Have your say on reforming public engagement on land-use bylaws first appeared on British Columbia Law Institute.