See for yourself why Quickscribe is now the go-to source for legislation in BC. No credit card required. No invoices issued.
We offer an easier & affordable way to research, interpret and track Federal and BC laws of your choosing
With Quickscribe, you'll never have to question whether you are accessing the most current version of a law again. QS 2.0 provides access to laws that are updated weeks before any other source. How do we do it? Our system was built with the flexibility to allow us to post changes the same day they come into law. In fact, as a convenience to our clients, Quickscribe will routinely post early consolidations of key laws prior to coming into force. These early consolidations are rarely, if ever, found elsewhere.
Whether you want to contribute and engage in the legislative discussions or simply benefit from reading the annotations made by others, Quickscribe's annotations deliver dynamic, value-added content that will enrich your legislative research experience.
Quickscribe's ever-growing panel of hand-selected expert annotators contributes annotations throughout the legislation for the benefit of all users.
You may also add your own annotations and save them as private (encrypted), organizational (only readable to those in your firm) or even shared with the QS community (moderated). The choice is up to you.
QS 2.0 includes a number of timely, detailed and fully customizable alerts that will notify you of both upcoming and recent changes to laws of your choosing. These popular alerts will ensure you keep informed of the very latest changes. Each alert will provide detailed information with a link to the new/proposed change. Quickscribe has gained a reputation for sending these notices sooner than any other service on the market. Visit our alerts page to learn how these alerts can work for you.
Have you ever been frustrated with the process of trying to print off individual sections or entire laws from other sites? Quickscribe's popular PDF tools make it easy to print off professional-quality PDF versions of selected sections or entire laws on demand! These PDFs can also be saved to file. Clients even have the option to print both the annotated and non-annotated versions of the law.
Access to historical legislation is important. Quickscribe excels at offering historical research tools that help you find what you are looking for quickly and efficiently. Learn more
Quickscribe's Hansard feature makes it easy for you to determine statutory intent directly from the section being debated. Learn more.
Supplemental notes provide you with yet another layer of helpful information about each section of law. Supplemental notes can provide insight on the “how” and “why” a section came to be. Notes can also be used to link you to relevant government documents, research papers, reports and news articles that provide additional context about the section you are reading. We believe that the more context you have, the better equipped you will be to truly interpret the intent of the law.
You can easily and securely create and save your own private annotations (PAs) throughout the legislation.
PAs are fully encrypted and can only be viewed by you. You can search, edit, manage and delete these as needed.
QS will even transfer your PAs over to a new account should you move to another organization. By default, all annotations are set to private.
Organizational annotations (OAs) will help to facilitate collaborative discussion and awareness about legislative issues and cases that may be of interest to others in your organization.
OAs are fully encrypted and can only be read or shared by others in your organization. For larger organizations, OAs can be filtered and saved to subgroups. You can follow OAs posted by colleagues and reply to or share OAs within your organization at any time. Document upload and link-building tools make it easy to contribute to the Knowledge Management for your organization.
To save an annotation as an Organizational annotation, select "My Organization" when you go to save the annotation. The default is set to save annotations as Private.
Quickscribe Community Annotations are posted for the benefit of all Quickscribe users. Saving your annotation as a QS Community (public) Annotation (QSCA) is a great way to share and contribute to the ever-growing, collaborative knowledge base that comprises all users.
For example, your research may have uncovered a valuable tip or reference to a case that might be of interest to others using Quickscribe. Other users may want to initiate a discussion relating to the interpretation of a vague reference in a proposed law. The Community annotations are intended to facilitate this type of content/discussion for the benefit of all users.
All QSCAs are moderated and reviewed prior to publishing. Portions of QS Community annotations may also be published to various public sites.
To save an annotation as an Organizational annotation, select "QS Community" when you go to save the annotation. The default is set to save annotations as Private.
Traditionally, an annotated law will include information about the application and intent behind the sections in a law. While many of the QS Community and Expert annotations will include these types of annotations, we have broadened the definition to also include references to:
By broadening the definition of an annotation, we can deliver a more dynamic, flexible and relevant research tool that will evolve over time and as laws change.
Quickscribe 2.0 offers you the ability to make and save annotations as Private (only readable by you) or Organizational (accessible to only those in your organization); both are encrypted. Annotations can also be posted to the Quickscribe Community. These are moderated and some restrictions apply. Quickscribe's Expert Annotators will contribute annotations for the benefit of all users.
In summary, an annotation is any note that offers additional substantive value for our users.
Section 23 of the Builders Lien Act provides for the ‘removal of claims of lien by payment of total amount recoverable’. In Metro-Can Construction (PE) Ltd. v. Escobar, 2022 BCSC 287, Master Bilawich held that the order sought by the petitioner under...
 (2).jpg)
Christopher Hirst, Alexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP on BUILDERS LIEN ACT
In Goldsmith v. National Bank of Canada 2016 ONCA 22 the court reviewed the requirements for leave which under section 140.8 require that the court is satisfied that the action is brought in good faith and there is a reasonable possibility that the action will be resolved at t...
Teresa Tomchak, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP on SECURITIES ACT
This provision is mandatory and there is no discretion to order payment to be made to someone other than the PGT. See 2019 BCCA 171 at paras 7 - 11.
Dan Orsetti, Public Guardian And Trustee of British Columbia on WILLS, ESTATES AND SUCCESSION ACT
Provisions in the Act which prohibit specific types of ipso facto clauses, such as this one, which invalidates clauses that grant an accelerated payment or forfeiture of term because of someone’s filing of a Notice of Intention, do not oust the general common law “anti-dep...
Greg GEHLEN, GEHLEN DABBS CASH LLP on BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT [FEDERAL]
It is not always necessary to show that the proposed action is in the best interest of the estate. It may be sufficient if it is necessary or expedient to protect the interest of a specified person.
Stanley Rule, Sabey Rule LLP on WILLS, ESTATES AND SUCCESSION ACT
In R. v. Christensen, 2020 BCPC 208 the Court accepted expert medical evidence that it would be unethical to use the authority of the Mental Health Act to enforce compliance with anti-androgen medication for someone convicted of repeated sexual offences. The expert physicians ...
Laura Johnston, Health Justice on MENTAL HEALTH ACT
In British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Le, 2023 BCCA 200, the appellants challenged an order that s. 5 of the Disbursement and Expert Evidence Regulation, BC Reg 210/2020 (the "Regulation") was both invalid and unconstitutional. The Court of Appeal held that a reg...
OnPoint Legal Research, Onpoint Legal Research Law Corporation on EVIDENCE ACT
The litigation conduct of a corporation that is a co-defendant to an oppression action, in particular a corporation’s vigorous conduct of its defence and the filing of a counterclaim, cannot be actionable as oppression. In this case, the parties were shareholders of the ...
Debby Cumberford, Deborah M. Cumberford on BUSINESS CORPORATIONS ACT
The policy considerations underlying section 60 of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, together with the nature of constructive trusts was the subject of some debate in a series of articles published in The Advocate in 2022.
A healthy and respectful canvassing of p...
D. Michael Bain, K.C., Hamilton Howell Bain & Gould on WILLS, ESTATES AND SUCCESSION ACT
Although the Mental Health Review Board has generally not published its decisions, in November 2020 it released a small sample of anonymized decisions. The sample decisions address some procedural issues, such as the exclusion of evidence that was not disclosed to involuntary ...
Laura Johnston, Health Justice on MENTAL HEALTH ACT
This section was drawn from section 2.1 of the Arbitration Act, RSBC 1996, c. 55, and is needlessly confusing. On the one hand it seems to say that people can agree to arbitration anything that "may be the subject of a family law dispute in the future," while on the other is s...
John-Paul Boyd QC, John-Paul E. Boyd Arbitration Chambers on FAMILY LAW ACT
The Director of Adjudication allowed the Ministry of Attorney General, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Health’s request that the commissioner grant certain remedies on the basis that an individual was abusing FIPPA’s review and inquiry process: the com...
Karen Zimmer, Alexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP on FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACT
In Bison Acquisition Corp 2021 ABASC 188 after unsuccessful discussions, Bison (which was formed by funds managed by Brookfield) made an unsolicited offer for IPL. Subsequently IPL executed an arrangement agreement with Pembina which contained a $350M termination fee.
&...
Teresa Tomchak, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP on NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 62-104 TAKE-OVER BIDS AND ISSUER BIDS (B.C. Reg. 21/2008)
In Singh v Singh, 2020 BCCA 21, the Court of Appeal restricts the nature of the "other factors" that may be argued in favour of reapoprtionment. Justice Garson reviews the specific factors identified in section 95(2) and, applying the principles of statutory interpretation, co...
John-Paul Boyd QC, John-Paul E. Boyd Arbitration Chambers on FAMILY LAW ACT
The Court in Triad Mechanical Inc. v. Maple Leaf Green World Inc., 2021 BCSC 1865 considered the dictionary definition of "conclusively", and determined that "conclusively deemed" within s. 33(4) of the Builders Lien Act, does not leave open the question of whether there is a ...
Christopher Hirst, Alexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP on BUILDERS LIEN ACT
The threat of an oppressive act, even if the threat has passed before the matter proceeds to court, will not necessarily oust the court's jurisdiction to find oppression. If the aggrieved shareholder continues to suffer from the effect of the past oppression, the application m...
Debby Cumberford, Deborah M. Cumberford on BUSINESS CORPORATIONS ACT
Section 35 is a "comprehensive code for the modification or cancellation of the interests in land identified in subsection (1)"(para. 40). It ousts the common law.
Peter Roberts, Lawson Lundell LLP on PROPERTY LAW ACT
The class action privacy case, Ari v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 2022 BCSC 1475 involved a claim by individuals (and those who lived with them) whose personal information was improperly accessed without an apparent business purpose, by an ICBC adjuster. The adj...
Karen Zimmer, Alexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP on PRIVACY ACT
The Court of Appeal quashed a decision of the Tribunal that denied legal representation on the basis that legal counsel could instead provide assistance anonymously and behind the scenes.
The constitutionality of the Civil Resolution Tribunal's limitation on legal representat...
Melanie Harmer, McMillan LLP on CIVIL RESOLUTION TRIBUNAL ACT
Crisci v. Vancouver Island Health Authority, 2023 BCSC 1883: Section 51 encompasses not only the initial investigatory stage, but also the implementation stage of the complaint process.
Joel Morris, Harper Grey LLP on EVIDENCE ACT
Decisions of the court under s. 17 are not limited appeal orders and therefore leave is not required under s. 11 of the Court of Appeal Rules to appeal.
Melanie Harmer, McMillan LLP on JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEDURE ACT
In White (Re), the BC Supreme Court sitting in bankruptcy held that new evidence may be admitted in appeals under this section. The normally restrictive rules around new evidence, as set out in Palmer v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759, would work injustice if applied to the ...
Greg GEHLEN, GEHLEN DABBS CASH LLP on BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT [FEDERAL]
The implications of this section are canvassed by Jennifer Bednard in "Will or Will Not: Practice Implications of Section 58 of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act Part I: What is a Testamentary Document Anyway?" (2020) 78 Advocate 527.
D. Michael Bain, K.C., Hamilton Howell Bain & Gould on WILLS, ESTATES AND SUCCESSION ACT
Following the decision in Mortimer v. Bender, 2020 BCSC 483, a beneficiary or wills variation claimant must bring an application under this section to pursue a claim against the personal representative if the claim relates to the personal representative's conduct during the de...
Stanley Rule, Sabey Rule LLP on WILLS, ESTATES AND SUCCESSION ACT
In Champ’s Fresh Farms Inc. v. British Columbia (Employment Stanards Tribunal), 2023 BCSC 1075, the BC Supreme Court considered a petition for judicial review from a decision of the Employment Standards Tribunal relating to minimum wage for farm workers picking mush...
Scott Marcinkow, Harper Grey LLP on EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS REGULATION 396/95
Section 36 of the Property Law Act does not apply to the Crown land owned or controlled by the Provincial government: Fox v British Columbia (Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development), 2022 BCSC 541
Peter Roberts, Lawson Lundell LLP on PROPERTY LAW ACT
In Hawthorn v Hawrish, 2023 BCCA 182, the Court of Appeal upheld the chambers judge’s order dismissing applications made under s. 7 of the Arbitration Act, SBC 2020, c 2 (the "Act") for a partial stay of proceedings in favour of arbitration. The Court of Appeal held that...
OnPoint Legal Research, Onpoint Legal Research Law Corporation on ARBITRATION ACT
Maddock v. British Columbia, 2022 BCSC 1605: Section 54(h) empowers the Provincial Health Officer ("PHO") to decline the request of a person affected to reconsider (s. 43), review (s. 44), or reassess (s. 45) an order or a variance order during an emergency. This provision exi...
Joel Morris, Harper Grey LLP on PUBLIC HEALTH ACT
