Company and Finance News:

Here's Why Enacting Franchise Law in
British Columbia is a Welcome Initiative
British Columbia is considering enacting franchise legislation, joining Ontario, Alberta, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and Manitoba, after the British Columbia Law Institute (BCLI) submitted a recommendation to the BC provincial government. The BCLI is not a legislative body, but there is every reason to expect its report enclosing draft legislation and its recommendation will be adopted by the government and will form the future of doing business as a franchise system within that province. This report follows almost a year of consultation with industry stakeholders to determine the features of franchise law in British Columbia, with special attention paid to what works and what doesn't in the five provinces with franchise legislation. Read the Financial Post article. 

BCSC Panel Finds that Director of Mining
Company Breached Securities Laws
A British Columbia Securities Commission panel has found that a BC resident and former director of a BC mining company breached securities laws regarding prospectus requirements. The panel found that Daniel Grant McGee authorized, permitted or acquiesced in illegal distributions when he was a director of Cinnabar Explorations Ltd. In a notice of hearing issued August 20, 2012, the Executive Director alleged that Cinnabar, McGee, Christopher James Bass, and Dale Zucchet breached securities laws regarding prospectus requirements. McGee sought and obtained an adjournment of the hearing of the allegation against him. In September 2013, a commission panel found that Bass and Zucchet illegally sold shares of Cinnabar to seven investors between April and July of 2011. The company claimed that the seven investors fell under the family, friends and business associates and accredited investor exemptions in the securities rules. The panel found they did not. The panel found that McGee signed the exempt distribution reports relating to the Cinnabar when no prospectus exemption was available, thereby authorizing the illegal distribution. Read the BCSC article. 

BC Securities – Policies & Instruments
The following policies and instruments were published on the BCSC website in the month of June:

• BCN 2014/09 – Lead Regulators and Exempting Regulators in relation to the Memorandum of Understanding respecting the Oversight of Exchanges and Quotation and Trade Reporting Systems as of July 1, 2014
• MFDA – Notice of BCSC Non-Objection to Proposed Amendments to MFDA By-law No. 1 and Articles of Continuance
• CSA Staff Notice 21-313 – Information Processor for Exchange-Traded Securities other than Options
• CSA Staff Notice 21-314 – Information Processor for Corporate Debt Securities
• BC Notice 2014/08 – Request for Comment – Application by Aequitas Neo Exchange Inc. for an exemption from recognition as an exchange
• 81-102 – CSA Notice of Amendments to National Instrument 81-102 Mutual Funds, National Instrument 81-106 Investment Fund Continuous Disclosure, National Instrument 41-101 General Prospectus Requirements and Related Consequential Amendments
• MFDA – Request for Comment: Proposed Amendments to MFDA Rules 2.8.3 (Rates of Return), 5.3 (Client Reporting) and 5.4 (Trade Confirmations)
• CSA Staff Notice 11-327 – Extension of Consultation Period – Proposed National Policy 25-201 Guidance for Proxy Advisory Firms
• BCN 2014/07 – Adoption of BC Instrument 81-516 Exemption from prospectus delivery requirement and fund facts document delivery requirement for pre-authorized investment plans

For more information visit the BC Securities website. 

PST Bulletins
The following PST bulletins and notices were issued in the month of June:

• Bulletin CTB 001, Natural Gas and Biomethane Sellers
• FIN 449 , Certificate of Exemption Natural Gas
• Bulletin PST 200, PST Exemptions and Documentation Requirements
• Bulletin PST 203, Energy, Energy Conservation and the ICE Fund Tax
• Bulletin MFT-CT 005, Tax Rates on Fuels
• Bulletin MFT-CT 006, Self-Assessing Motor Fuel and Carbon Tax
• Bulletin PST 110, Production Machinery and Equipment Exemption
• Bulletin PST 112, Logging Industry
• Bulletin PST 113, Oil and Gas Industry – Producers and Processors
• Bulletin PST 114, Oil and Gas Industry
• Bulletin PST 115, Oil and Gas Industry – Service Providers
• Bulletin MFT-CT 008, International Fuel Tax Agreement and Motive Fuel User Permits
• BC IFTA Operating Manual, is a revised brochure
• Bulletin MFT-CT 004, Registered Consumers
• Bulletin PST 504, Contractors Who are Also Retailers or Wholesalers
• Bulletin PST 001, Registering to Collect PST
• Bulletin PST 101, Farmers
• Bulletin PST 111, Mining Industry
• Bulletin PST 127, Veterinarians and Pet Stores
• Bulletin PST 315, Rentals and Leases of Goods
• Bulletin PST 317, Tax Payment Agreements
• Bulletin PST 400, PST Refunds
• Bulletin PST 501, Real Property Contractors

For more information, visit the Consumer Taxes website.

Investment Fund Modernization: Phase 2 Implementation
to Start in September of 2014
The Canadian Securities Administrators today announced the adoption of final amendments that will implement certain aspects of Phase 2 of the Modernization of Investment Fund Product Regulation Project. The mandate of Phase 2 involved generally addressing the regulatory gap between non-redeemable investment funds and mutual funds by focusing on imposing certain core operational requirements on publicly offered non-redeemable investment funds that are generally analogous to the requirements applicable to mutual funds. The final amendments to be adopted as of September 22, 2014 stem from proposed amendments published last year, and will involve the imposition of core investment restrictions for non-redeemable investment funds while also enhancing disclosure requirements regarding securities lending activities by investment funds. The following is a summary of some of the final amendments that are set to come into force, which will [be reviewed] in further detail in subsequent posts. Notably, the final amendments do not extend to the creation of a more comprehensive alternative funds framework (planned to be effected through an overhaul of National Instrument 81-104 Commodity Pools). Read the full article posted by Stikeman Elliott.

Energy and Mines News:

Canada High Court Decision Impacts
Energy Project Development
The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) by unanimous decision on June 26, 2014 in the case of Tsilhqot' in Nation v. British Columbia declared for the first time "Aboriginal title" in Canada for the Tsilhqot'in Nation over tract of land in the interior of British Columbia. This case furthers a long line of decisions on Aboriginal rights and title. In Tsilhqot'in, the SCC prescribes the meaning of Aboriginal title and articulates new tests for establishing it. The decision lacks clarity on the practical application of its ruling. The result, at least in the short run, is uncertainty, and additional clarity from the courts will be required. In the meantime, if major projects are to proceed, a much higher level of cooperation among First Nations, government and project proponents will be required. In brief, Aboriginal title confers on the group that holds it the exclusive right to decide how the land is used and the right to benefit from those uses, subject to the restriction that the uses must be consistent with communal ownership of the interest and must assume the continued enjoyment of the land by future generations. Government infringement of Aboriginal title is theoretically possible in certain circumstances, but court challenges on this aspect are likely to abound. Read the full article by Warren Brazier with Clark Wilson LLP. 

Triton Wins 25-Year Licence to Export LNG from BC
Project would be smaller than rival Petronas-led LNG terminal
The National Energy Board has approved an application by Triton LNG Limited Partnership for a 25-year licence to export liquefied natural gas from a port in British Columbia. Triton, a partnership announced last year between Calgary-based AltaGas Ltd. and Idemitsu, will ship the gas from either Kitimat or Prince Rupert. The NEB says a proposed liquefaction terminal will require further regulatory approval before construction can begin. In their application, the Triton partners said they envisaged a facility capable of processing 2.3 million tonnes of LNG per year. Read CBC article.   

Meikle Wind Energy Project Granted Environmental
Assessment Approval
Environment Minister Mary Polak and Energy and Mines Minister Bill Bennett have issued an Environmental Assessment Certificate to Meikle Wind Energy Limited Partnership for the Meikle Wind Energy Project, located approximately 30 km northwest of Tumbler Ridge. The decision was made after considering a review led by British Columbia's Environmental Assessment Office. The ministers have issued the certificate with legally enforceable conditions that have given them the confidence to conclude that the project will be constructed, operated and decommissioned in a way that ensures that no significant adverse effects are likely to occur. A record of the factors that the ministers considered in making their decision can be found in the Reasons for Ministers' Decision at: http://tinyurl.com/pt335qn. The Environmental Assessment Certificate includes 24 conditions. Design restrictions are specified in the Certified Project Description. Each of the conditions and the Certified Project Description are legally binding requirements that Meikle Wind Energy must meet to be in compliance with the certificate. Read the full government news release. 

Family and Children News:

SCC to Hear Appeal Involving Challenge to
Validity of Child Support Guidelines
The Supreme Court of Canada [recently] granted leave to appeal in the case of Strickland v Canada, a decision of the Federal Court. Two things make this unusual. First, the Supreme Court of Canada hardly ever grants leave to appeal in family law cases. Second, the appeal concerns the validity of the Child Support Guidelines. The Child Support Guidelines were implemented by the federal government in 1997. They are a regulation to the Divorce Act; the Divorce Act is the federal law, in force across Canada, that deals with divorce, child support, spousal support and children's parenting arrangements after separation. (The Guidelines have been adopted by all of Canada's provinces and territories, except Quebec, as a part of their local laws on family breakdown.) The Divorce Act says that when a judge is making an order for child support, the judge must do so "in accordance with the applicable guidelines." Although there are some exceptions, s. 3(1) of the Guidelines says that "the amount of a child support orders ... is ... the amount set out in the applicable table, according to the number of children ... and the income of the spouse against whom the order is sought." The tables are probably the Guidelines' best known feature and, as s. 3 suggests, they set out how much money must be paid as child support according to the payor's income and the number of children support is being paid for. Read the full article by John-Paul Boyd and posted on JP Boyd on Family Law – the Blog. 

Do I Need A Prenup? Cohabitation And Marriage
Agreements In British Columbia
You don't need to be Gwyneth Paltrow or Brad Pitt to benefit from a "prenup". A prenup, or what lawyers call a Cohabitation Agreement, is an agreement that you and your partner make before you move in together, or while you are living together, which addresses several important decisions both during the course of your relationship and in the event of a relationship breakdown. Similarly, a Marriage Agreement is an agreement that you and your partner make in anticipation of getting married, although it can also be made at any point during the course of your marriage. Do you really need one? If you answer "yes" to any of the questions, chances are you may need a Cohabitation or Marriage Agreement to properly protect your interests. Read the full article by Monica McParland with Pushor Mitchell LLP. 

Federal Court of Appeal Decision on Family Status
Discrimination Clarifies Employer Obligations
On May 2, 2014, the Federal Court of Appeal released its much anticipated decision in Canada (Attorney General) v. Johnstone ("Johnstone"). In the decision, the court clarified both the scope of the "family status" protection found under the Canadian Human Rights Act and the legal test that must be met before an employer's duty to accommodate can be triggered.

Background of Johnstone Case
Johnstone involved a mother seeking accommodation for childcare obligations from her employer, Canadian Border Services Agency ("CBSA"). Ms. Fiona Johnstone, who along with her husband worked rotating, irregular, and unpredictable shifts, sought a fixed three-day schedule so that she could more easily plan for the childcare needs of her two young children. Similar accommodation had been provided in the past by CBSA to employees who had made medical and religion based accommodation requests. The CBSA agreed to give Ms. Johnstone a fixed schedule on a part time basis only, thereby negatively impacting her access to benefits, pension, and promotion opportunities. Ms. Johnstone filed a human rights complaint based on family status. In defence, CBSA claimed that it had no legal obligation to accommodate Ms. Johnstone. The CBSA did not make an undue hardship argument or a bona fide occupational requirement claim.

Read the full article by Karen R. Bock and Co-authored with Kristine Gorman, Summer Student with Davis LLP. 

Provincial Court (Family) Rules Amendments
The Provincial Court (Family) Rules was amended on June 23, 2014 by B.C. Reg. 122/2014. Amendments include a new subrule that specifies when a judge may require written notice from a family justice counsellor in relation to mediation matters.

Supreme Court Family Rules Amendments
Effective July 1, 2014, B.C. Reg. 121/2014 brought changes to the Supreme Court Family Rules, adding a new rule and form: Rule 2-1.2 – Arbitration Awards and Form F17.3. 

New Penalty Program Introduced to Encourage Compliance
The Ministry of Environment is introducing a new administrative penalty program to encourage compliance with the Environmental Management Act (EMA) and the Integrated Pest Management Act (IPMA). The new program makes it possible to give out financial penalties to violators who fail to comply with an Act or regulation, or with orders, licences or permits issued by ministry officials. The goal is to encourage compliance and discourage potential violators. Administrative penalties are to be used when non-compliance has a direct environmental impact or interferes with the protection of the environment. This new program fills a gap between warnings and violation tickets for minor offences and criminal prosecutions for more serious offences. Examples of violations include:

• Discharging waste without a required authorization;
• Releasing a substance into the environment that exceeds what is permitted under an authorization or regulation; or
• Failure to submit monitoring reports.

A violation will fall into one of four categories with maximum penalties of $2,000, $10,000, $40,000 and $75,000. Each violation will be evaluated on a case by case basis with no fixed penalties. Final decisions on penalties will be made by statutory decision makers within the Ministry of Environment. Read full government news release. 

Report Slams Fish Farm Secrecy on BC Coast
The federal government puts wild salmon stocks and research at risk by not releasing important data about fish farms along the BC coast, says a report by the Environmental Law Centre at the University of Victoria. The report takes issue with the lack of information available to researchers and the public about when and where disease outbreaks occur on salmon farms. Currently, when there is a disease outbreak at an aquatic animal facility – such as a fish farm – it must be reported to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. However, the federal agency only makes some of that information available to the public. For example, on March 26 a fatal virus called hemorrhagic septicemia was reported in Atlantic salmon somewhere in BC with no further details. Read the Times Colonist article. 

Environmental Appeal Board Decisions
There were two Environmental Appeal Board decisions released in the month of June:

• Wildlife Act – Darren James Linnell v. Regional Manager, Recreational Fisheries and Wildlife Program (Cariboo Region) [Final Decision – Appeal Dismissed with Recommendation]
• Water Act – Assistant Regional Water Manager and Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations v. Jill Fitzpatrick [Preliminary Application: Application to Strike – Granted in Part]

Personalized Medicine: Patent Issues in Canada and Europe
"Personalized medicine," in its broadest aspects, is essentially the tailoring of treatments to individual characteristics, needs and preferences. More commonly, the term is used to refer to the tailoring of treatments to an individual based on his or her personal genetic makeup and prior treatment history. The development of personalized medicine approaches involves much time, effort and expense, and there is a strong interest in protecting innovations in this area in a meaningful way. In Europe and Canada, methods of medical treatment are not considered to be patentable subject-matter, with both jurisdictions taking the approach that patents ought not to interfere with the ability of physicians to exercise their skill and judgment. Protection for therapeutic methods can nevertheless still be obtained in both jurisdictions by drafting claims in an acceptable "use" format.

Treatment-related personalized medicine claims are by definition "second medical use" claims, in that they relate to the use of a known therapeutic. An added complication is that such claims typically also relate to the use of that known therapeutic to treat the same disease as previously treated, differing only in one or more or the population being treated, the route of administration, the dosage amount and/or the dosage regimen. [In this article,] the approaches being taken by the courts and the patent offices in Europe and Canada with respect to such claims are summarised briefly. Read the article By Emma Macfarlane, PhD and Konrad A. Sechley, PhD with Gowlings. 

Key Changes To Temporary Foreign
Worker (TFW) Program
In this article Alfred Kempf, Chair of the Employment Law Group with Pushor Mitchell, identifies seventeen key changes to the TFW program. These include:

1. Program name change from Labour Market Opinion ("LMO") to Labour Market Impact Assessment ("LMIA"); li>
2. Caps on percentages of foreign workers starting at 30% and reducing to 10% in 2016;
3. Prohibition of TFW in low wage and skill groups in areas in certain sectors (food services, accommodation and retail trade) where there is high unemployment (6% or higher). The current unemployment rate in the Thompson Okanagan region is 7.1%; Introduction of low-wage and high-wage distinction of workers;
4. Registration fee increase from $275 to $1000 per employee;
5. Employers hiring TFW must commit to not displacing Canadian workers and must disclose the numbers of Canadians who applied for and interviewed for the jobs;
6. Duration for the term of employment reduced to one year from two;
7. Employers seeking to hire high-wage temporary foreign workers (with very limited exceptions) will now be required to submit transition plans to show how they will hire Canadians, including through higher wages, investments in training and more active recruitment efforts from within Canada.

Read the remaining ten items.

Federal Government Completes "Target Benefit
Pension Plan" Consultations – WESA
The federal government issued the news release [June 25, 2014] regarding the target benefit pension plan consultations that it commenced in late April 2014. Target benefit pension plans – also known as shared risk plans – represent an alternative to defined benefit or defined contribution pension plans. Several provinces have already passed legislation providing for target benefit pension plans, but in many cases that legislation is not yet in force. Read the article posted on Greg Gowe's Canadian Workplace Law website. 

Court Looked at More than Bardal Factors
when Awarding Reasonable Notice
The Supreme Court of British Columbia awarded a terminated employee reasonable termination notice by considering elements other than Bardal factors including reasonable expectation of job security, the presence of a non-competition agreement and the impact on the employee's health due to the stress of the termination.

Facts of the case and decision
The employee was 42 years old and had two Master's Degrees. He had 19 years' experience in the international tax industry and was a senior tax manager since 2002. The employer was a private equity company in the merger and acquisition transaction business. It developed and improved proprietary tax-structured products and business models for internal use and for sale to enhance value and reduce taxable exposure for corporations and shareholders. The employee was specialized in international and American tax. He was a Senior Manager in the Structured Financial Solutions group which provided tax advice for high-level financial transactions, often multimillion or billion dollar transactions. His work involved sophisticated and complicated analysis of the tax legislation. As a result, he earned an annual salary of $135,000 plus a bonus in the range of 15 percent of income, and he also received benefits.

Read the full HRinfodesk article by Christina Catenacci with First Reference Inc. 

Local Government News:

Attention Councils and Boards: Response Sought to
Building Code & Community Charter Changes
The Province of BC has informed UBCM that it intends to implement a uniform building code and amend the Community Charter to eliminate local government concurrent authority in this area. The Province has invited UBCM to join an advisory group to review the proposed legislative changes on the condition that UBCM signs a confidentiality agreement prior to any discussions. UBCM is seeking membership response on the course of action proposed by the Province. Read the UBCM article.

SMS – Bulletin – CASL – For Local Governments
Key provisions of the government of Canada's new legislation: An Act to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy by regulating certain activities that discourage reliance on electronic means of carrying out commercial activities, and to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, the Competition Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and the Telecommunications Act, otherwise known as "Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation", or "CASL", [came] into force on July 1, 2014. While CASL will have a much larger impact on the private business sector, it will impact local governments who send electronic messages that contain any form of commercial content. Read the client bulletin on the Stewart McDannold Stuart website.

Liquor Policy Changes Underway
Modernization of provincial liquor laws is currently underway. The Provincial government has begun implementation of the 73 recommendations outlined in the Liquor Policy Review (LPR) released in January. The Province has indicated that it will continue to work with the Local Government Working Group on Liquor Policy in the development of future liquor policy, and will ensure that the views of local government are taken into consideration. The Government has announced implementation of the following nine LPR recommendations:

• Happy Hours (LPR #16)
• Transferring Small Amounts of Liquor between Establishments (LPR #61)
• Patrons Carrying Liquor Between Adjoining Establishments (LPR #63)
• Family SOLs can serve UBrew/UVin or homemade wine, beer and cider (LPR #53)
• UBrew/UVin Licensees May Now Own Other Liquor-related Establishments (LPR #70)
• Liquor Service without Food in Food-primary Establishments (LPR #36)
• Liquor Sales at Farmer's Markets (LPR #31)
• Liquor Sales of Product Showcased at Food/Beverage Festivals (LPR #32)
• Minors in Liquor-primary Establishments (LPR #34)

Read the full article on the UBCM website.

Child Death Review Panel Recommends Increased
Water Safety – New Local Government Bylaws?
A review by the BC Coroners Service Child Death Review Panel into the drowning deaths of 35 children and youth between 2007 and 2013 has identified the need for more effective water safety measures. The panel's report recommends that local governments consider establishing a bylaw that requires barrier fencing to limit child access to backyard pools. The report recommends that the bylaw contain the following requirements:

• 4-sided fencing with a minimum height of 1.22 m (4 feet);
• self-closing and self-latching gate;
• retrofitting of 4-sided fencing for existing pools; and,
• includes in-ground, above-ground and inflatable pools.

Read the full article published on the UBCM website. 

Miscellaneous News:

Can't Search This: BC Court Grants Global
Restraining Order against Google
On June 13, 2014, the British Columbia Supreme Court ordered Google Inc. to remove all of a company's websites from its search results. Equustek Solutions Inc. v. Jack (Equustek) marks the first time a Canadian court has ever made such an order, which resulted in an injunction against a non-party that will have global ramifications. The case follows in the footsteps of European decisions, also involving Google, where courts have been asked to assume jurisdiction over Google's search services and order the removal of impermissible results. The plaintiffs in Equustek manufactured computer networking devices. They claimed that the defendants in the main action stole trade secrets while working for the plaintiffs and used these trade secrets to develop and sell their own products online. The defendants had flagrantly disobeyed various court orders since the commencement of the main action, including an order prohibiting them from carrying on business online. Google was not a party to the main action. Insofar as the defendants' websites were listed on Google's search engine, however, Google was facilitating the defendants' ongoing breach of the court's orders. Google had previously complied with the plaintiffs' request to remove specific links to the defendants' websites from Google.ca, but was unwilling to block all of the defendants' websites from coming up in any search, conducted on any Google website, from any location. Read the full article published by Joe McArthur and Clayton Gallant (Summer Law Student) with Blakes. 

Price Hikes Mean Not-So-Happy Hour for Some
A number of pubs already sell beer for less
than the minimum price under the new policy
Happy Hour laws, enacted by the provincial government [June 20] to allow cheaper drinks in BC, have backfired in the case of beer, where in some cases prices will rise. The province has set the minimum beer price per ounce at 25 cents, plus sales taxes. However, based on that formula, the minimum price of a standard 60-ounce pitcher of beer is now $15, plus taxes. Some bars will have room to lower prices. For instance, Malone's Urban Drinkery and Sports Bar on West Pender charges $13.70 (about 27 cents per ounce) plus taxes for a 51-ounce pitcher of Molson Canadian. But a number of pubs in the province already sell pitchers for less than the new minimum. Read the Vancouver Sun article. 

Speed Limits on Some BC Highways to Hit 120 km/h
The speed limits on some multi-lane highways in B.C. are going up to 120 kilometres per hour, Transportation Minister Todd Stone announced on [July 2] in Kamloops. The new speed limit will be in effect on:

• Highway 5 (the Coquihalla) from Hope to Kamloops.
• Highway 97C (the Connector) from Aspen Grove to Drought Hill Interchange, Peachland.
• Highway 19 (the Island Highway) from Parksville to south of Willis Road, Campbell River.

Stone also announced that new variable speed zones that use sensors and radar technology to monitor road conditions will be tested on sections of the Trans-Canada between Revelstoke and Sicamous, the Coquihalla near the snowshed and parts of the Sea-to-Sky Highway. Read CBC article. 

Proving Fault After A Transit Bus Collision – The Reverse Onus
If you are injured while a passenger in a transit bus British Columbia law requires the bus driver to prove they were not at fault. This is a ‘reverse onus' from most personal injury claims where the Plaintiff must prove the Defendant was at fault. Reasons for judgment were released last week by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, addressing this. In last week's claim (Tchir v. South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority) the plaintiff was riding as a passenger in a bus "when an unidentified driver came to an abrupt stop in front of the bus". The bus driver was forced to brake hard to avoid collision and the Plaintiff was thrown from her seat and injured. The Court found both motorists were to blame for the incident. Read the full article by Erik Magraken on his blog BC Injury Law. 

Property and Real Estate News:

Is Anybody Home? BCCA Clarifies Scope of
Vacancy Exclusion in Homeowner's Policy
The British Columbia Court of Appeal in Coburn v. Family Insurance Solutions, 2014 BCCA 73, recently clarified the scope of a vacancy exclusion in a homeowner's policy, concluding that a house with no one living in it for more than 30 days is vacant even where:

• the homeowner attends the property daily to conduct renovations;
• the homeowner sleeps in the house for a night;
• the homeowner has secured prospective tenants; and
• the prospective tenants store personal possessions on the property.

In Coburn, the homeowners began extensive renovations to a house they had previously rented to long-term tenants whose lease had come to an end. While those renovations were underway, no one lived in the house. The previous tenants had already removed all their belongings, and they were not going to return. The homeowners stored a mattress in the garage, but they did not store any personal items, furnishings or equipment in the home for their use. The homeowners found new tenants who agreed to move in after the renovations were completed. Prior to the move-in date, those new tenants stored some of their belongings under a lean-to shelter outside the house, but not in the house. Read the full article by Laura Wright with Alexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP. 

CMHC Drops Mortgage Insurance for Condo Developers
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. says it will no longer offer mortgage insurance to developers to finance the construction of new condo buildings. The Crown corporation has not actually provided any of the controversial insurance since 2011, but is now officially removing the product. It was controversial because the insurance made it easier for condo developers to finance new projects, but the Bank of Canada and economists have been warning that there's a risk too many new condos are being built in cities like Toronto. Read the Globe and Mail article.

Wills and Estates News:

When Can You Remove an Executor or Trustee?
It is common for someone writing a will to appoint as their executor a family member or friend. Sometimes this is done without understanding what it means to be an executor. Sometimes the ability and propriety of the proposed executor is not considered. Often, the relationship between the proposed executor and the will-maker changes after the will has been written. Sometimes joint executors cease to get along. These types of issues frequently do not come up until after the will-maker has died. However, each of these scenarios may cause problems in administering an estate or trust. In addition, this may give rise to misunderstandings and distrust between the executor/trustee and the beneficiaries, often other family members. The administration of the estate or trust can, sadly, descend into acrimony and bitterness with the executor doing nothing, doing things that may not be appropriate or joint executors failing to agree. What can be done?

One possibility is to seek to remove the executor. An executor's conduct is circumscribed by both the common law and statute. The court has an inherent jurisdiction to remove a trustee but there is also statutory authority to do so. For example, the sections 30 and 31 of the Trustee Act allow the courts to remove a trustee in appropriate circumstances and substitute a new trustee. Stated generally, this will be done where it is necessary to safeguard the welfare of the beneficiaries of the estate. Not every mistake or act of neglect by a trustee will lead to replacement. The acts or omissions must be found to endanger the trust property or show a want of honesty, fidelity, or proper capacity to carry out a trustee's duties. Not surprisingly, the application of this test has been the subject of numerous cases in a myriad of situations. Read the full article by Peter Roberts with Lawson Lundell LLP. 

Presumption in an Application to Probate a Copy
of a Will if the Missing Original was Last in the
Possession of a Will-Maker Who Lost Capacity
The following article was published by Stan Rule and posted on his blog Rule of Law:

The general rule is that an executor must have the original will in order to obtain a grant of probate in British Columbia, but it is possible to probate a copy or obtain a grant of probate based on other evidence of the will if the original goes missing. But as I have written before, if the will was last in the possession of the will-maker, there is a presumption that the will-maker destroyed the original will in order to revoke. The presumption may be rebutted with evidence that the will-maker would not have intended to revoke the will. What happens if the missing original will was last in the possession of the will-maker, but the will-maker's mental functioning declined to the point where she was no longer capable of making or revoking a will?

Read the full article. 

Beneficiary Designations – Part 5 of WESA
Requires Changes to Estates Practice
A beneficiary designation is a simple, informal way to pass certain types of benefits to a beneficiary outside one's estate. Part 5 of WESA expands the kinds of benefit plans that can be dealt with by beneficiary designation and introduces new rules about how designations operate. To say Part 5 is dry reading is an understatement, but the changes are significant. Executors, administrators and beneficiaries should be aware of the issues and implications and where necessary the lawyers who advise them should make appropriate adjustments to how they practice. Read the full article published by John W. Bilawich with the law firm Holmes & King and published on the Courthouse Libraries blog The Stream.