Rahman v. Windermere Valley Property Management Ltd.

Rahman v. Windermere Valley Property Management Ltd.

The appeal is allowed because the chambers judge erred as a matter of law by relying exclusively on the appellant's disorganized sworn affidavit and failing to give effect to inconsistent but potentially determinative pleaded allegations and unsworn in-court statements by a self-represented litigant. The judge should have taken reasonable steps (adjournment, accepting a supplemental affidavit, or sworn oral evidence) to place those statements into admissible sworn form before concluding there was no genuine issue for trial; dismissal under R.9-6 was therefore premature.

Citation
2022 BCCA 258
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Monie Rahman; Respondent (defendant): Windermere Valley Property Management Ltd. dba First Choice Realty; Respondent (defendant): Michael Douglas Warriner; Respondent (defendant): Shawnna Marie Warriner; Respondent (defendant): Justin Owen Brown; Respondent (defendant): Stephanie Wanda Brown; Respondent (defendant): Wade Ashley Huber; Respondent (defendant): Jennifer Shirley Clara Farrel
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Summary Judgment Dismissing Civil Action / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From Chambers Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment (rule 9 6), Limitation Period/postponement, Negligent Misrepresentation, Self Represented Litigant Accommodations, Weighing of Evidence and Credibility, Ounjian Postponement Test
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Tort Real Property Contract Law Limitations Law Summary Judgment (rule 9 6) Limitation Period/postponement Negligent Misrepresentation +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Monie Rahman

Appellant (plaintiff)

Windermere Valley Property Management Ltd. dba First Choice Realty

Respondent (defendant)

Michael Douglas Warriner

Respondent (defendant)

Shawnna Marie Warriner

Respondent (defendant)

Justin Owen Brown

Respondent (defendant)

Stephanie Wanda Brown

Respondent (defendant)

Wade Ashley Huber

Respondent (defendant)

Jennifer Shirley Clara Farrel

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Summary Judgment Dismissing Civil Action / Court of Appeal Decision on Appeal From Chambers Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the action against First Choice was statute-barred under the Former Limitation Act
  2. 2 Whether the postponement test (Ounjian) was satisfied so time did not run before May 18, 2012
  3. 3 Whether the chambers judge impermissibly weighed evidence and made credibility findings on a R.9-6 application

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed because the chambers judge erred as a matter of law by relying exclusively on the appellant's disorganized sworn affidavit and failing to give effect to inconsistent but potentially determinative pleaded allegations and unsworn in-court statements by a self-represented litigant. The judge should have taken reasonable steps (adjournment, accepting a supplemental affidavit, or sworn oral evidence) to place those statements into admissible sworn form before concluding there was no genuine issue for trial; dismissal under R.9-6 was therefore premature.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order granting summary judgment dismissed; the chambers judgment dismissing the action is set aside and the matter is remitted for further proceedings consistent with these reasons (including permitting the appellant to place her in-court statements into sworn form)