News
Jorie Les wins undue influence summary trial
AMLC's Jorie Les obtained judgment in an undue influence claim arising out of a predatory relationship…
AMLC's Jorie Les obtained judgment in an undue influence claim arising out of a predatory relationship.
The parties met when the plaintiff was 77 and the defendant was 62. The plaintiff was elderly and vulnerable. Over the course of their seven-year relationship, the defendant isolated the plaintiff from her friends and family and gained control over all aspects of the plaintiff's life. In addition to exhausting the plaintiff's financial resources, the defendant deceived her into adding him on title to her property as a joint tenant.
Following a two-day summary trial in which Jorie presented extensive affidavit evidence from the plaintiff's family, friends, and neighbors, the court granted judgment from the bench returning title to the property to the plaintiff alone. Jorie was also successful in obtaining an order for punitive damages of $50,000.
To read the decision, visit 2024 BCSC 1745. For more information on Allen / McMillan's real estate litigation and estate litigation practices, please contact Jorie at jorie@amlc.ca.
AMLC lawyers to represent interveners in religious freedom case
AMLC lawyers John Trueman and Chloe Trudel will represent the British Columbia Humanist Association in an important appeal...
AMLC lawyers John Trueman and Chloe Trudel will represent the British Columbia Humanist Association in an important appeal to help define the boundary between privacy rights and religious freedom.
On June 12, 2024, Court of Appeal Justice Winteringham granted leave to intervene to the BC Humanists and another organization, the Association for Reformed Political Action. In her reasons, Justice Winteringham noted that “both the BCHA and the ARPA have experience and expertise, as well as a unique perspective, which will be of benefit to the division hearing the appeal.”
The appeal itself, which will be heard on October 29, 2024, involves a challenge by certain religious organizations and individuals to the constitutionality of the Personal Information Protection Act, the BC law that governs how private sector organizations collect, use, and disclose personal information. The BC Humanists will argue, among other things, that religious freedom should not become a vehicle to subvert the privacy rights of individuals, including people who have chosen to leave organized religion. AMLC lawyer Wes McMillan represented the BC Humanists in the trial court.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal allows interventions sparingly. Any proposed intervenor must offer a “unique and different perspective that will assist the Court in the resolution of the issues” without seeking to “expand the scope of the appeal by raising issues not raised by the parties.”
Allen / McMillan Litigation Counsel’s award-winning pro bono practice often includes public interest interventions for organizations such as the BC Humanists, who bring important perspectives to the law but have limited resources. AMLC lawyers have previously represented the BC Humanists at the BC Human Rights Tribunal, the BC Supreme Court and, on two occasions, at the Supreme Court of Canada.
To read the Court of Appeal’s reasons on the application to intervene, visit 2024 BCCA 291.
John Trueman and Katelyn Chaudhary win property assessment appeal involving Galiano Island forest land
AMLC lawyer John Trueman and articled student Katelyn Chaudhary successfully represented a managed forest land owner on Galiano Island in an appeal against a decision of the BC Property Assessment Appeal Board. The landowner had a 960 square foot unfinished dwelling on his 90-acre property, which he used and slept in while managing the forest. The assessor had classified the land beneath the dwelling as “residential,” thus depriving the landowner of the preferential tax treatment afforded to private managed forest land owners.
On appeal, the BC Supreme Court held that the landowner’s use of the dwelling to further the production and harvesting of forest resources on his property was sufficient to maintain the managed forest land classification. The Board had fallen into error by imposing additional requirements, such as considering whether a dwelling was “required” to manage the forest, or whether it was “integrally related” to the production or harvesting of forest resources.
Articled student Katelyn Chaudhary, making legal submissions in court for the first time in her career, successfully argued that the Board failed to properly consider the actual road and water distances involved in transporting logs from Galiano Island to the nearest sawmill.
For many years, AMLC lawyers have defended the rights of private managed forest owners on Galiano Island to live on their properties, just as many farmers live on their farms. This decision reinforces the principle that managed forest land owners should not lose that classification when they have a dwelling they use to help manage the forest.
To read the decision, visit 2024 BCSC 561. For more information on Allen / McMillan’s real estate litigation practice, please contact Wes McMillan at wes@amlc.ca or John Trueman at john@amlc.ca.
Allen / McMillan appearing at the Supreme Court of Canada in May 2024
On May 21 and 22, 2024, Greg, Alex, and Mia will be appearing at the Supreme Court of Canada in Ontario (Attorney General) v Working Families Coalition (Canada) Inc, a case involving the impact of electoral spending regulations on citizens’ right to meaningfully participate in the democratic process under section 3 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Our team will be representing the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, and providing the Supreme Court of Canada with a submission on the history of how of section 3 of the Charter has been interpreted, and the importance of contextual factors in assessing the application of the section 3 right.
For those who enjoy both constitutional rights and early mornings, the hearing will be streamed live through the Supreme Court of Canada’s website.
For more information on Allen / McMillan’s pro bono public law practice, please contact Greg at greg@amlc.ca.
Wes McMillan and Nojan Kamoosi win commercial real estate trial
Wes McMillan and Nojan Kamoosi successfully represented the potential purchaser of a development site in North Vancouver. The potential purchaser signed a contract to purchase the site from the defendant owners (a bare trustee and the beneficial owner). As is common, the contract contained a provision allowing the purchaser to convert the land purchase to a share purchase. The plaintiff elected to do just that. For a variety of reasons, the deal did not complete, and the plaintiff sued for return of its $1.35 million deposit.
The case turned on the corporate structure utilized by the defendant owners. Wes and Nojan successfully argued that the contract was unenforceable because the parties to the contract did not own the shares to be purchased (exemplified by the latin maxim nemo dat quod non habet, or, one cannot sell that which one does not own), notwithstanding that the contracting defendants and owners of the shares had common directors and were prepared to give effect to the contract (i.e. sell the shares to the purchaser). This case highlights the importance for parties to commercial contracts to carefully consider whether all of the persons to give effect to the contract are also parties to it.
To read the decision, visit 2024 BCSC 248. For more information on Allen / McMillan’s real estate litigation practice, please contact Wes at wes@amlc.ca and Nojan at nojan@amlc.ca.
Wes McMillan, Natalie Chan, and Mia Stewart win 19-day commercial real estate trial
Wes McMillan, along with AMLC’s Natalie Chan and Mia Stewart, as well as Nerissa Yan of Yan Muirhead LLP, obtained judgment for over 30 putative pre-sale purchasers. In 2015 and 2016, the plaintiffs entered into 32 pre-sale contracts for a development in Richmond, BC known as "AFLA". In 2019, the developer purported to exercise a right to terminate those contracts, citing an inability to obtain constructing financing and a lawsuit that had been commenced by the general contractor against the developer.
Wes persuaded the court that the developer was dishonest in its performance of the pre-sale contracts and was not entitled to terminate them. Wes also persuaded the court that the plaintiffs' damages should be determined as at the date they accepted the developer's breach of contract (August 2021), not the date of dishonest performance (July 2019). The plaintiffs were awarded over $13 million in damages.
To read the decision, visit 2024 BCSC 216. For more information on Allen / McMillan’s real estate litigation practice, please contact Wes at wes@amlc.ca and Natalie at natalie@amlc.ca.