Hughes v. Gibson

Hughes v. Gibson

Because the appellants obtained a stay and retained ownership of the property but failed to pay 2011 taxes, interest and penalties, the court set the tax adjustment date as the date of conveyance (May 15, 2012); further, because the appeal and order for specific performance involved the appellants only in their...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2012 BCCA 328
Parties
Respondent (plaintiff): Donald Laurence Charles Hughes; Appellant (defendant) Executrix and Personal Capacity: Julie Anne Gibson; Appellant (defendant) Executrix and Personal Capacity: Vera Martha Brown
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Specific Performance; Property Transaction; Appeal / Court of Appeal – Supplementary Reasons Following Dismissal of Appeal (supplementary Judgment)
Outcome
Supplementary reasons accede to respondent's requests: order varied to set tax adjustment date as date of conveyance and costs fixed against the estate.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Property Tax Adjustment, Costs of Appeal, Representative Capacity of Executrices, Stay Pending Appeal
Source Language
english
Equity Property Law Estate Administration Civil Procedure Specific Performance Property Tax Adjustment Costs of Appeal Representative Capacity of Executrices +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donald Laurence Charles Hughes

Respondent (plaintiff)

Julie Anne Gibson

Appellant (defendant) Executrix and Personal Capacity

Vera Martha Brown

Appellant (defendant) Executrix and Personal Capacity

Procedural Posture

Specific Performance; Property Transaction; Appeal / Court of Appeal – Supplementary Reasons Following Dismissal of Appeal (supplementary Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjustment date for property taxes should be the trial judge's date or the date of conveyance given the appellants obtained a stay and failed to pay taxes
  2. 2 Whether the personal appellants are liable for the costs of the appeal or whether costs should be borne by the deceased's estate given the appellants acted in a representative capacity

Ratio Decidendi

Because the appellants obtained a stay and retained ownership of the property but failed to pay 2011 taxes, interest and penalties, the court set the tax adjustment date as the date of conveyance (May 15, 2012); further, because the appeal and order for specific performance involved the appellants only in their representative capacities as executrices and there was no enforceable personal judgment against them, the costs of the appeal are payable from the estate of the deceased, not from the appellants personally.

Court Disposition

Supplementary reasons accede to respondent's requests: order varied to set tax adjustment date as date of conveyance and costs fixed against the estate.

Orders

  • Adjustment date for property taxes and related interest and penalties fixed as May 15, 2012 (date of conveyance).
  • Costs of the appeal to be paid from the estate of Vera Starrett Brown.