Case Studies, Pendrell Place: Litigation - Christopher Monk's Amended Statement of Claim, April 25, 2003
This outstanding litigation launched by Christopher Monk after he purchased his leaky rotten condo, Unit #402, at Pendrell Place was as a result of his investigation of the files of the Strata Corporation. His investigation determined that he had unknowningly bought into a leaky rotten condo complex, and that he had received a fraudulent Form B upon purchasing his unit.
The particulars of his claim can be found below:
Court action reference number: S032263
Between: Christopher Robert Monk (Plaintiff)
And: Robert Crowe, Gordon Owens, Coldwell Banker Westburn Realty Ltd., Ascent Real Estate Management Crop., Martin Lewis, Michael Roach (Defendants)
Christopher Monk Amended Statement of Claim 25 Apr 2003.pdf
Note: This is one of the cases involved in the current Case Management process.
VR 1280: Appeal Court confirms leaky condo strata corporation suing Oberti Oberto Architecture must produce evidence of authorization to sue
COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
| Citation: | The Owners, Strata Plan VR 1280 v. Oberto Oberti Architecture and Urban Design Inc., et al., |
| 2003 BCCA 213 |
Date: 20030408
Docket: CA030541
Between:
The Owners, Strata Plan VR 1280
Appellant
(Plaintiff)
And
Oberto Oberti Architecture and Urban
Design Inc., Oberto Oberti, Def Co. Ltd.
And XYZ Co. Ltd., #1 through XYZ Co. Ltd. #10
Respondents
(Defendants)
| Before: | The Honourable Mr. Justice Esson |
| (In Chambers) |
| D.B. Gleig | Counsel for the Appellant (Plaintiff) |
| C.E. Hirst | Counsel for the Respondents (Defendants) |
| Place and Date of Hearing: | Vancouver, British Columbia |
| 2 April 2003 | |
| Place and Date of Judgment: | Vancouver, British Columbia |
| 8 April 2003 | |
Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Mr. Justice Esson:
[1] This is an application seeking leave to appeal an interlocutory ruling by Mr. Justice Henderson ordering the plaintiff to produce “evidence of the special resolution and copies of the written consents required pursuant to section 15(7)(b) of the Condominium Act RSBC 1996”.
[2] Counsel for the plaintiff submits that the order raises questions of general importance regarding the conduct of the business of Strata Councils and, in particular, the degree of confidentiality attaching to such documents.
[3] In my view, the order is a straightforward application of the Supreme Court Rules relating to discovery of documents. In any event, the claim to privilege in respect of them is now effectively moot, the plaintiff having produced to the defendants a copy of the special resolution and copies of all of the written consents which are in its possession.
[4] Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
“The Honourable Mr. Justice Esson”
