Strata Plan LMS149 v. Appia Developments Ltd.

Strata Plan LMS149 v. Appia Developments Ltd.

The interrogatories were not wholly objectionable and must be answered, but only by owners who are subsequent in title to the original purchaser; the defendant may explore the defence that subsequent purchasers' knowledge negates their individual claims, but questions directed at common property claims are not...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2003 BCSC 1653
Parties
Plaintiff: The Owners, Strata Plan LMS149; Defendant: Appia Developments Ltd.; Defendant: 397487 B.C. Ltd.; Defendant: 705401 Alberta Ltd.; Defendant: Barclay McLeod; Defendant: Walrond Consultants Ltd.; Defendant: Sarangi and Rodger Consultants Ltd.; Defendant: Mainland Stucco & Drywall Inc.; Defendant: Quorom Construction Inc.; Defendant: L & S Mechanical Ltd.; Defendant: Almetco Building Products Ltd.; Third Party: Jimmy Nat Bosa; Third Party: Alexander Park; Third Party: Aron Development Corporation; Third Party: City of Coquitlam; Third Party: Peter Ross Limited; Third Party: Appia Developments Ltd. (formerly known as Hollyglen Holdings Ltd.); Third Party: East & West Alum Craft Ltd.; Third Party: J.C.D. Developments Incorporated; Third Party: SRC Engineering Consultants Ltd.; Third Party: Transwest Applicators Ltd.; Third Party: Barclay McLeod; Third Party: Sarangi and Rodger Consultants Ltd.; Third Party: 705401 Alberta Ltd.; Further Third Party: B.A. Custom Metal Ltd.; Further Third Party: 369385 B.C. Ltd. (formerly Aron Development Corporation)
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Representative Strata Condominium Construction Defect/tort Action / Pre Trial Interlocutory Application Regarding Interrogatories (application to Strike/compel)
Outcome
Application to strike dismissed; interrogatories to be answered but limited to owners who are subsequent in title to the original purchaser; parties have liberty to return regarding specific questions; costs reserved to trial judge.
Legal Topics
Interrogatories, Representative Action, Discovery Obligations, Limitation Period, Damage to Common Property, Scope of Interrogatories
Source Language
english
Strata/condominium Law Construction Law Tort Civil Procedure Evidence/discovery Interrogatories Representative Action Discovery Obligations +3 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Owners, Strata Plan LMS149

Plaintiff

Appia Developments Ltd.

Defendant

397487 B.C. Ltd.

Defendant

705401 Alberta Ltd.

Defendant

Barclay McLeod

Defendant

Walrond Consultants Ltd.

Defendant

Sarangi and Rodger Consultants Ltd.

Defendant

Mainland Stucco & Drywall Inc.

Defendant

Quorom Construction Inc.

Defendant

L & S Mechanical Ltd.

Defendant

Almetco Building Products Ltd.

Defendant

Jimmy Nat Bosa

Third Party

Alexander Park

Third Party

Aron Development Corporation

Third Party

City of Coquitlam

Third Party

Peter Ross Limited

Third Party

Appia Developments Ltd. (formerly known as Hollyglen Holdings Ltd.)

Third Party

East & West Alum Craft Ltd.

Third Party

J.C.D. Developments Incorporated

Third Party

SRC Engineering Consultants Ltd.

Third Party

Transwest Applicators Ltd.

Third Party

Barclay McLeod

Third Party

Sarangi and Rodger Consultants Ltd.

Third Party

705401 Alberta Ltd.

Third Party

B.A. Custom Metal Ltd.

Further Third Party

369385 B.C. Ltd. (formerly Aron Development Corporation)

Further Third Party

Procedural Posture

Representative Strata Condominium Construction Defect/tort Action / Pre Trial Interlocutory Application Regarding Interrogatories (application to Strike/compel)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interrogatories served on the representative plaintiff and owners must be answered
  2. 2 Whether subsequent purchasers must answer interrogatories about knowledge of defects
  3. 3 Whether a defendant may strike a claim for failure to answer interrogatories

Ratio Decidendi

The interrogatories were not wholly objectionable and must be answered, but only by owners who are subsequent in title to the original purchaser; the defendant may explore the defence that subsequent purchasers' knowledge negates their individual claims, but questions directed at common property claims are not necessary for the defendant's interest. The application to strike was therefore refused and answers were ordered with limitations.

Court Disposition

Application to strike dismissed; interrogatories to be answered but limited to owners who are subsequent in title to the original purchaser; parties have liberty to return regarding specific questions; costs reserved to trial judge.

Orders

  • Application to strike the plaintiffs' claim dismissed.
  • Interrogatories must be answered by owners of strata lots who are subsequent in title to the original purchaser.