This Court is able to determine the enforceability of a settlement agreement summarily, unless the Court is satisfied that there is a genuine issue as to whether a settlement agreement has been reached under the law of contract: Carlton v. Carlton, 2017 BCSC 603 at paras. 20-23 and 44.

The test to determine if parties have reached a settlement agreement is whether parties have agreed on all essential terms. Determining whether the parties have agreed on all essential terms is separate from determining whether the parties have agreed on a form of release incorporating the essential terms agreed upon. A term requiring furnishing of a release and a consent dismissal is implied when a settlement agreement is reached: see Fieguth v. Acklands Ltd., 1989 CanLII 2744 (B.C.C.A.) at para. 35.

TRI-CITY LEGAL regularly discusses Wills and Estate Litigation, often referred to as Wills’ Variation law. One facet of this law includes contesting whether a Will is valid or not. A number of factors come into play when a Will is contested. It is never easy, nor is it simple, to contest a Will’s validity. Typically, it involves obscure laws, legalese, and the testator’s (aka the will-maker’s) mental capacity.

At times, it may involve suspicious circumstances, which was discussed in one of our previous articles.

Class actions result when a company’s, for example, actions or inactions impact a large class of individuals, rather than one individual plaintiff.

Two well-known cases, turned-Hollywood movies, of class actions include those represented in “Erin Brockovich”, starring Julia Roberts and “A Civil Action”, starring John Travolta.

Throughout Canada, like the US, class action litigation has increased in the recent years. Many of these actions arise due to “data breaches” (aka privacy and security breaches) on mass scales. This includes breaches of Yahoo, LifeLabs, and Simon Fraser University, among many others.

Mr. Bergman attempted to give evidence about a number of different issues. The plaintiffs objected on the basis that there was no affidavit evidence filed and they had no notice of the evidence that Mr. Bergman was giving. I advised Mr. Bergman a number of times that it was not fair and not in accordance with proper procedure for him to simply “tell his story” without putting before the Court sworn evidence which was served on the plaintiffs. I note that a self-represented litigant should be given some leeway but they must still comply with the Supreme Court Civil Rules, B.C. Reg. 168/2009 [Rules]. As our Court of Appeal has noted, “self-represented litigants do not have ‘some kind of special status’ that allows them to ignore rules of procedure”: 0927613 B.C. Ltd. v. 0941187 B.C. Ltd., 2015 BCCA 457 at para. 64. The Statement of Principles on Self-Represented Litigants and Accused Persons, (Ottawa: Canadian Judicial Council, 2006) “imposes an obligation on self-represented parties to be respectful and familiarize themselves with the relevant practices and procedures of the court process”: 0927613 B.C. Ltd. at para. 65

Jennifer Salling, who hails from Port Coquitlam and attended Terry Fox Secondary School (graduating in 2005), immediately embraced her close friend and teammate, Daniel Lawrie (from Langley, BC respectively) upon the victory. Lawrie and Salling have been teammates since starring for BC, the national team, as well as for the University of Washington Huskies. It was in Seattle where the two joined forces, were together named NCAA D1 First Team All-Americans, and led the Huskies to a NCAA D1 National Championship.

Port Moody native, Kent Johnson drafted to the NHL going 5th overall to the Columbus Blue Jackets!

The PPPA was a legislative response to what have been referred to as strategic lawsuits against public participation (“SLAPPs”). SLAPPs are lawsuits initiated against individuals or organizations that speak out or take a position on issues of public interest—with the intention being to silence or otherwise deter that party from participating in public affairs. To mitigate SLAPPs harmful effects, Ontario, British Columbia, and Quebec have enacted laws commonly referred to as anti-SLAPP legislation.

Product: Neutrogena Beach Defense and Ultra Sheer sunscreens, for adults and children, in aerosol spray format.

Issue: Johnson & Johnson Inc. is recalling all lots of Beach Defense and Ultra Sheer aerosol spray sunscreens due to elevated levels of benzene, which may pose serious health risks after long-term, repeated use.

What to do: Stop using the recalled products. Consult a health care professional if you have used any of these products and have health concerns. Continue using other sunscreen as directed on the product label.

Mr. Justice Edleman, as he is required to do, balanced the interests of the testator and the children and varied the will. The Trial Judge stated as follows:

I am…of the view that a somewhat greater gift to Rose and Samsun is warranted given the clear intentions of Mrs. Tom. I will therefore order specific gifts of $300,000 to each of Rose and Samsun (or Samsun’s estate). The remainder of the estate is to be divided equally between the five siblings or their estates. In my view, this variation strikes the appropriate balance between Mrs. Tom’s clear intent to recognize the role of Samsun and Rose in her final years while meeting her moral obligations to her other children.

Appeal allowed and the Notice of Contention dismissed.

The application judge erred in finding that testator’s liberty interests were engaged by the provisions of the TFMA. The Lawens, as public interest litigants, did not put any evidence before the application judge which would have allowed him to determine that the liberty interests were engaged and, alternatively, even if they were engaged, whether they were in accordance with the fundamental principles of justice.

As the baby boomer generation slowly and sadly passes, unfortunately, they are uncertain about what to do with their family home; particular issues arise when they to leave (or more appropriately, “bequeath”), the family home to some, but not all, of their children.

In this instance, the home owner has a number of options. This article focuses the two most frequent options utilized: joint tenancy and deed of gift.

In a recent Wills & Estate Litigation case: McCulloch v Nociar, 2021 BCSC 1328, the Defendant applied to send the Plaintiff to an independent medical examination (“IME”) with respect to her “alleged allergies, disabilities, and other medical conditions which she alleges requires her to live in specialty housing, in particular a suite (the “Suite”) on property in Surrey, B.C. (the “Property”) owned by the applicant, and to allow access to that Suite to Total Safety Services Inc. to report on the character and conditions which establish it as specialty housing”.

BREAKING NEWS: Plaintiff ordered to an IME in a Wills & Estates Litigation case.