A British Columbia Supreme Court judge has issued a split decision regarding two certificates of pending litigation (CPLs) involved in a complex real estate dispute spanning properties in Squamish and Lake Country. The ruling, made on October 27, saw one application to cancel a CPL dismissed while another was allowed.
Key Takeaways
- A judge has ruled on CPLs related to properties in Squamish and Lake Country.
- One application to cancel a CPL was denied, while another was granted.
- The dispute involves allegations of fraud and conspiracy in property transactions.
The Squamish Property Dispute
Real estate agent Jessica Ashley Davis initiated a lawsuit against developer Edward Archibald concerning a 2020 deal to purchase a property at 1513 Squamish Valley Road in Squamish. Davis alleged that she and Archibald held equal shares in the property through a company, 2170943 BC Ltd. She further claimed that Archibald and others conspired in 2021 to sell the property to 1316215 BC Ltd. and Cloudburst Creek Property Inc. without her consent and at a price below market value.
Allegations Regarding the Lake Country Property
Davis further accused Archibald of using the proceeds from the Squamish property sale to acquire 5572 Oyama Lake Road in Lake Country. She alleged that Phantom Projects Ltd. transferred this property in August 2021 to 1317439 BC Ltd., a company she believes is controlled by Archibald. Davis filed a lawsuit alleging fraud and registered CPLs against both the Squamish and Lake Country properties.
The Court's Decision
Justice Sandra Wilkinson addressed the applications to cancel the CPLs. Regarding the Oyama Lake Road property, Wilkinson noted that Davis valued her claim against Phantom Projects Ltd. at $400,000 but failed to establish a clear link between the alleged misappropriated funds and the Oyama property. The judge pointed out that the claim relied on inferring the source of funds based on the sequence of events and did not specify which portion of the purchase funds belonged to Davis versus her family members.
Despite payments made towards the mortgage on the Oyama property by 1317439 BC Ltd., the mortgage has been in default since August 2022. Phantom Projects Ltd. initiated foreclosure proceedings on the property, which has reportedly fallen into disrepair. Wilkinson acknowledged that the CPL had impacted a potential sale and needed resolution before foreclosure. The judge granted Phantom's application to cancel the CPL on the Oyama property, stating that its continued presence caused hardship. However, the application by 1316215 BC Ltd. to cancel its CPL was denied.
Implications of the Ruling
The judge emphasized that the plaintiff's interests would be considered within the court-supervised foreclosure process for the Oyama property. The decision highlights the complexities of property disputes and the legal mechanisms, like CPLs, used to protect interests during litigation.
