Focus On
NEW In-House Counsel | Insurance | Intellectual Property | Immigration | Natural Resources | Real Estate | Tax

Real Estate

Latest

Tuesday, March 07, 2017 @ 3:30 PM

Homeowners hit with $10K fine for illegal rental

Justice of the peace Gerry Altobello wanted to send a message. ... [read more]

Tuesday, March 07, 2017 @ 9:38 AM

Langlois lawyers launches series of business law videos

Langlois lawyers has launched a series of video clips featuring its lawyers, directed at the business community. ... [read more]

Tuesday, March 07, 2017 @ 12:02 AM

Rethink the billable hour to give middle class access to justice | Julius Melnitzer

The best thing the legal profession’s regulators could do to ensure access to justice for the middle class is to ban hourly billing — or at least mandate some sense into its use. ... [read more]

Friday, March 03, 2017 @ 3:02 PM

Access to Justice: Thinking big about access to justice | Thomas Cromwell

Access to justice is the biggest challenge facing our legal system. And just about every lawyer I know cares deeply about the health of that system and many are trying to help. But do we understand the problem and are we making progress? Those questions will be the jumping off spot for my exclusive to The Lawyer’s Daily column dedicated to access to civil and family justice in the coming months. ... [read more]

Thursday, March 02, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Real Property Law - ADVERSE POSSESSION - Crown lands - Required elements - Adverse possession - Continuous - Successive occupants

Appeal by the City of Nelson (City) from two judgments of the British Columbia Court of Appeal setting aside two decisions dismissing the Mowatts’ proceedings related to a parcel of land located in Nelson, British Columbia. While the Mowatts took possession of the disputed lot in 1992, their claim rested upon what they said was continuous adverse possession thereof by three families in succession, beginning in the early 20th century. To enforce that claim, the Mowatts brought two proceedings: an action for a declaration that the provincial Crown, which held registered title, did not own the disputed lot and therefore could not transfer it to the City; and a petition for judicial investigation under the Land Title Inquiry Act into their title to the disputed lot. The chambers judge granted the City’s summary trial application to dismiss both proceedings, pointing to what he characterized as an “evidentiary gap”, an interruption in the continuity of adverse possession, running from approximately 1916 to 1920. The Court of Appeal reversed the decision, finding that the chambers judge had erred in his treatment of the evidence of continuous occupation, and concluding that continuous adverse possession of the disputed lot was demonstrated from December 1909 to at least February 1923. In response to the City’s submissions, the Court of Appeal also held that lack of registration did not prevent the transfer to the Mowatts of their predecessor’s interest in the disputed lot, and that the law of British Columbia did not require the Mowatts to demonstrate that their use of the disputed lot was inconsistent with the intended use of the “true owner”. The Mowatts argued that the chambers judge erred in assessing continuous adverse possession by confusing possession with occupation, requiring them to show continuous occupation when the central question went to continuity of possession. ... [read more]

Thursday, March 02, 2017 @ 8:50 AM

ADVERSE POSSESSION - Crown lands - Required elements - Adverse possession - Continuous - Successive occupants

Appeal by the City of Nelson (City) from two judgments of the British Columbia Court of Appeal setting aside two decisions dismissing the Mowatts’ proceedings related to a parcel of land located in Nelson, British Columbia. While the Mowatts took possession of the disputed lot in 1992, their claim rested upon what they said was continuous adverse possession thereof by three families in succession, beginning in the early 20th century. To enforce that claim, the Mowatts brought two proceedings: an action for a declaration that the provincial Crown, which held registered title, did not own the disputed lot and therefore could not transfer it to the City; and a petition for judicial investigation under the Land Title Inquiry Act into their title to the disputed lot. The chambers judge granted the City’s summary trial application to dismiss both proceedings, pointing to what he characterized as an “evidentiary gap”, an interruption in the continuity of adverse possession, running from approximately 1916 to 1920. The Court of Appeal reversed the decision, finding that the chambers judge had erred in his treatment of the evidence of continuous occupation, and concluding that continuous adverse possession of the disputed lot was demonstrated from December 1909 to at least February 1923. In response to the City’s submissions, the Court of Appeal also held that lack of registration did not prevent the transfer to the Mowatts of their predecessor’s interest in the disputed lot, and that the law of British Columbia did not require the Mowatts to demonstrate that their use of the disputed lot was inconsistent with the intended use of the “true owner”. The Mowatts argued that the chambers judge erred in assessing continuous adverse possession by confusing possession with occupation, requiring them to show continuous occupation when the central question went to continuity of possession. ... [read more]

Tuesday, February 28, 2017 @ 11:54 AM

Aird & Berlis welcomes two new partners

Aird & Berlis LLP announced that Faruk Gafic and Miranda Spence have become partners of the firm. ... [read more]

Monday, February 27, 2017 @ 3:13 PM

Top court revisits test for adverse possession

The quality of evidence necessary to establish historic civil claims on the balance of probabilities “must merely be as satisfactory as could reasonably be expected” in all of the circumstances, the Supreme Court said in an adverse possession judgment from B.C. with national impact. ... [read more]

Friday, February 24, 2017 @ 4:11 PM

Homersham joins Stikeman Elliott's real estate team

Stikeman Elliott welcomed Bob Homersham as senior counsel to their real estate group in Calgary. ... [read more]

Thursday, February 23, 2017 @ 7:00 PM

Pay close attention to crafting rent renewal clauses

Not applicable ... [read more]