Stonehouse v. The Attorney-General of British Columbia

Stonehouse v. The Attorney-General of British Columbia

The unregistered deed was operative against the grantor under the exception in s.35(1) and thereby severed the joint tenancy at the time of execution; consequently there was no surviving right of survivorship and, given the state of the register and absence of any other omission, the Registrar had no duty to inquire as to the grantor's death and no actionable omission, mistake or misfeasance arose under s.223(1).

Citation
[1962] SCR 103
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Richard Sheldon Stonehouse; Defendant/respondent: The Attorney-General of British Columbia
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 December 1961
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Joint Tenancy, Severance of Joint Tenancy by Conveyance to a Stranger, Registrar Duties on Registration, Assurance Fund Liability Under Land Registry Act, Registration of Instruments (s.35)
Source Language
English
Property Law Land Registration Real Property Joint Tenancy Severance of Joint Tenancy by Conveyance to a Stranger Registrar Duties on Registration Assurance Fund Liability Under Land Registry Act Registration of Instruments (s.35)

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Sheldon Stonehouse

Plaintiff/appellant

The Attorney-General of British Columbia

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an unregistered deed from one joint tenant to a stranger severs the joint tenancy at common law
  2. 2 Whether the Registrar had a duty to inquire as to the grantor's death before registering a three‑year old transfer
  3. 3 Whether omission by the Registrar in failing to inquire amounted to an actionable omission, mistake or misfeasance under s.223(1) of the Land Registry Act

Ratio Decidendi

The unregistered deed was operative against the grantor under the exception in s.35(1) and thereby severed the joint tenancy at the time of execution; consequently there was no surviving right of survivorship and, given the state of the register and absence of any other omission, the Registrar had no duty to inquire as to the grantor's death and no actionable omission, mistake or misfeasance arose under s.223(1).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.