Case information

Civil procedure — Pleadings — Contracts — Remedies — Post-incorporation contracts – Property — Real property — Covenants — Owners of one strata property seeking to unilaterally terminate the terms of a registered covenant under which amenities were shared and paid for by adjoining strata corporations — When should a claimant be held to the relief sought in its prayer for relief — What is the proper framework for determining when a court should grant an unpleaded alternative relief — Owners, Strata Plan LMS 3905 v. Crystal Square Parking Corp., 2020 SCC 29.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

The applicant strata corporation sought to unilaterally terminate its responsibilities under a registered covenant to share the use and costs of amenities located on an adjacent strata property. The respondent strata corporation brought a petition seeking to enforce the covenant. Although not included in its prayer for relief, it argued that the terms of the covenant were duplicated in a post-incorporation contract between the two strata corporations. The applicant countered that this argument was precluded because it had not been asserted in the respondent’s pleadings and could not be dealt with through a petition. It argued that if such a contract exists it can be terminated upon reasonable notice.

The Supreme Court of British Columbia rejected the applicant’s objections to the pleadings, finding that they sufficiently identified the matters in dispute. The court held that the respondent could not enforce a s. 219 covenant, but found that the parties had entered into a post-incorporation contract on the same terms as the covenant, which could not be terminated unilaterally by the applicant. The Court of Appeal for British Columbia dismissed the appeal.