Canada Case Law

Schaufelberger v. Cannon

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The claimant's application to set aside the 2009 Family Law Agreement was time‑barred under s.198(3) FLA and, on the merits, the agreement was not set aside because negotiation was not procedurally unfair and the agreement is not significantly unfair under s.93(5). The Family Law Agreement therefore governs; however, the court recognized implied partnership obligations and awarded the claimant compensation for post‑separation sweat equity and management, ordered specific reimbursements for a non‑partnership LOC withdrawal and for the claimant's cash infusion, allocated responsibility for the…

Source excerpt

• Setting aside family agreement (s.93 fla)
• Indefeasible title and rebuttal
• Limitation and discoverability
• Partition and sale of property
• Compensation for management / sweat equity
• Accounting

Read case analysis

Forster v. Sage

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

La Cour a rejeté l’argument d’exemption fondé sur la dépendance financière, mais a prorogé le délai pour déposer la demande reconventionnelle jusqu’au 20 décembre 2024.

• Extension of time
• Counterclaim
• Limitation period
• Dependency exemption s.3(1)(k)(ii)
• Prejudice and delay
• Limitation-period

Read case analysis

1025996 B.C. Ltd. v. Chahal

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The plaintiff alleged fraudulent misrepresentation in a blueberry farm purchase, claiming the defendants said 72 acres were planted. The court dismissed the action.

• Fraudulent misrepresentation
• Deceit
• Hearsay/principled approach
• Adverse inference
• Discoverability/limitation
• Exclusionary clause

Read case analysis

Fang v. Fang

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court partly allowed a strike application, striking occupation-rent set-offs but allowing investment-related set-offs and refusing to strike pleading allegations on duress, frustration, and implied term.

• Set-off
• Pleadings
• Strike out
• Limitation period
• Occupation rent
• Frustration

Read case analysis

Wu v. Ma

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the defendants liable for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty in an unlicensed investment-advisory relationship and rejected the Limitation Act defence.

• Investment advisor liability
• Unlicensed trading
• Kyc and kyp obligations
• Disclosure and misrepresentation
• Vicarious liability
• Damages assessment

Read case analysis

Kompaneets v. British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck a self-represented plaintiff’s notice of civil claim because it contained no material facts and disclosed no reasonable claim.

• Striking pleadings
• Abuse of process
• Summary dismissal (r.9-6)
• Adequacy of pleadings
• Search and seizure (s.8)
• Criminal records review program

Read case analysis

Sharma v. Mohammad

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Appeal from an order allowing a third party notice was dismissed. The court held it was bound by prior authority on when s. 16(a) of the Limitation Act starts time running.

• Limitation periods
• Third party notice
• Discoverability
• Indivisible injury
• Stare decisis
• Limitation-periods

Read case analysis

Sharma v. Mohammed

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court allowed leave to add a third party, holding that s. 16(a) of the Limitation Act was not triggered by a pleading filed in a different action.

• Limitation period
• Discoverability
• Contribution and indemnity
• Third party notice
• Limitation-period
• Contribution-and-indemnity

Read case analysis

Maussion v. Maussion

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed a limitation-based summary dismissal application in an estate dispute, holding the trust claim was discovered only when the defendant denied the trust in 2017.

• Resulting trust
• Limitation period
• Discoverability
• Breach of fiduciary duty
• Summary dismissal under rule 9-6
• Limitation-period

Read case analysis

Ferrer v. Roy

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Application for summary dismissal under the Limitation Act was dismissed because the key limitation issue turned on credibility that could not be decided on the written record.

• Discoverability
• Summary dismissal
• Duty to disclose
• Consolidation
• Credibility findings
• Limitation-act

Read case analysis