Open Bar Case Reviews

  • Who Needs to Know?

    July 2010

    Managers and human resources departments must be careful about what they communicate to others in the organization about employment termination. A recent case highlights the need for caution.

  • Deeply Committed?

    July 2010

    The B.C. Court of Appeal recently reviewed the legality of a development permit, and opined on whether the owner may have established a non-conforming use. Read the case review for comments on the possible implications of a development permit requirement on an owner's ability to establish an irrevocable commitment to use.

  • Don’t Jump the Gun: AWOL Employees

    July 2010

    A recent case is a reminder to employers not to assume that an absent employee has quit. Read more to learn how to deal with AWOL employees.

  • Small Omissions, Large Liability

    June 2010

    The Court of Appeal recently upheld the allocation of liability to a municipality for an accident which caused serious injury. The case highlights the importance of preventive measures to protect the public.

  • Workplace Policies: An Ounce of Prevention

    May 2010

    A recent decision highlights the limits to accommodation an employer may be required to make in respect of absenteeism on the grounds of physical disability.

  • No Warrant, No Entry

    May 2010

    The B.C. Court of Appeal has ruled as unconstitutional a provision of the Safety Standards Act, which provides for entry without a warrant to inspect for electrical safety risks that may be related to marijuana grow operations. Local governments may wish to review their practices.

  • Manners on the Picket Line

    May 2010

    The court has recently clarified that some conduct on picket lines will not be tolerated. Reasonable and respectful behaviour will be expected from union and management, although the parties may disagree on other matters.

  • Deference to Local Government Decisions

    April 2010

    A recent Court of Appeal decision, involving a challenge to a taxation bylaw, has re-affirmed that courts will often defer to the decisions of municipal councils and regional district boards.

  • Restructuring: The Pitfall of Constructive Dismissal

    April 2010

    A recent case highlights the danger of constructive dismissal when employers restructure their organizations. Read further to avoid this pitfall.

  • My Benefits Have Stopped.  I Want to Come Back to Work Now.

    April 2010

    When disability benefits end, and an employee wishes to return to work, what obligations do employers have to make enquiries and accommodate the employee?

  • Say it Clearly!

    February 2010

    The Supreme Court of Canada has reversed the finding on the applicability of a liability exclusion clause, where the issue at stake was the fairness of the RFP process. An important caution for local governments - read the fuller review for details.

  • I’ll Take the High Road

    February 2010

    In the political arena, defamatory statements and insuations may be defended by elected officials by careful use of their qualified privilege.

  • Walled In

    January 2010

    Courts have traditionally shown deference to local government decisions, and this deference can include the interpretation of building inspectors with respect to permit requirements.

  • In the Works

    January 2010

    Case law has expanded the non-conforming use protection of the Local Government Act to create an "irrevocable commitment to use" category of grandfathering. Read further for the court's most recent comment on this protection.

  • Tripped Up

    November 2009

    This recent case highlights the significance of the policy defence in local government liability cases, where so long as the policy is reasonable, the local government may be immune from liability in negligence.

  • Calculated Risk: Accepting Bids That Don’t Add Up

    October 2009

    Accepting corrections to bids after closing may breach an owner's duties to bidders. This is especially the case where the correction to pricing leads to a new low bidder. See this review of the Ontario court's decision in Maystar General Contractors Inc. v. Corporation of the Town of Newmarket.

  • OCP Omission - Fatal Error?

    September 2009

    In Wood v. Langley (2009) the court determined that the omission of a property from plans attached to the official community plan had the effect of omitting the property from being designated as covered by the plan. The case reinforces the need to carefully review plans to ensure they cover the properties intended.

  • Business License or Zoning?

    September 2009

    Municipalities may legitimately verify that the appropriate zoning is in place before issuing a business license. However, there are limits on the requirements which can be imposed as a condition of issuing a business license. The recent decision in Dragonwood Enterprises Ltd. v. Burnaby (City) is an example of one of these limits.

  • Say What?

    July 2009

    The Supreme Court of Canada has recently affirmed that political expression is a protected right, and that policies prohibiting political advertising on buses, developed by Translink and BC Transit, contravene the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. For local governments, this reinforces the need to carefully review sign regulations and content limits on advertising in public places.

  • Don’t Be Late!

    July 2009

    Virtual bid rooms and on-line bid submissions... much has changed in the world of tendering, but not everything. Timing of bid delivery is critical to a competitive tender process - accepting late bids confers an unfair advantage on non-compliant bidders.

  • Consider it Approved

    July 2009

    In its judgment of June 22, 2009, the BC Supreme Court issued an order to compel the Approving Officer for the Village of Anmore to approve an access route proposed for a subdivision.

  • Expropriation Surplus?

    July 2009

    On June 19, 2009, the BC Supreme Court ruled on an application by Camp Development Corporation for leave to amend its pleadings to challenge the "disposition" by the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority of surplus lands acquired in an expropriation.

  • Freedom to Choose?  Project Choices and Liability

    May 2009

    On May 27, 2009 the B.C. Supreme Court awarded damages of $600,000 to a business enterprise at 16th & Cambie Street in Vancouver on the basis of nuisance arising from construction of the Canada Line project.

  • Official Community Plan Consultation: What’s Happening in Your Shop?

    April 2009

    In the B.C. Supreme Court decision in Baynes Sound Area Society for Sustainability v. Comox Strathcona (Regional District) 2009 BCSC 565 of April 28, 2009 the court concluded that the “local government”, rather than staff, must make the determination regarding the consultation that may be required for official community plan (“OCP”) bylaws under section 879 of the Local Government Act.

  • Prime Contractor Obligations

    April 2009

    In December 2005, a worker employed by a contractor installing a new sewer service within municipal roadway was fatally injured by the collapse of the open trench in which the work was being constructed.

  • Hub Excavating Ltd. v. Orca Estates Ltd., 2009 BCCA 167

    April 2009

    In this case, a joint-venture owner of a proposed development had proceeded with the tendering process for the construction of the project despite having insight that the project could not be built within the projected budget.

  • Westcoast Landfill v. CVRD, 2009 BCSC 53 (CanLII)

    April 2009

    On January 30, 2009, the BC Supreme Court (“BCSC”) released its reasons in Westcoast Landfill v.
    CVRD and in doing so reaffirmed a number of well-established legal principles...

  • Vancouver (City) v. Zhang, 2009 BCSC 84 (CanLII)

    April 2009

    On January 29, 2009, the BC Supreme Court (“BCSC”) released its reasons in Vancouver (City) v. Zhang. This decision involves the City of Vancouver (the “City”) and its request for an injunction...

    • The content on this website is not intended to be legal advice, may have changed, or may be inapplicable to your situation. Please consult a lawyer for advice.

Open Bar Archive

Subscribe to Open Bar RSS Feed

Legislative Tip of the Month

Alert! Bill 11 – Changes regarding building permits and development cost charges are on the horizon. Soon, building permit applications will receive the same grandfathering protection from new DCC rates, as subdivision applications currently enjoy under the Local Government Act. Planning and approving officers should keep an eye on when Bill 11 becomes law, or check back here soon for a legislative update.