Posted Tuesday, December 23, 2025:
Sather v. Sather Ranch Ltd.,
2025 BCCA 464
–
2025/12/23
Court of Appeal
This appeal and cross appeal arise out of the appellant taking personal advantage of a corporate opportunity to acquire a parcel of land in breach of his fiduciary duty to the respondent. The summary trial resulted in two sets of reasons for judgment: 2023 BCSC 926, dealing with liability and 2024 BCSC 598, dealing with the appropriate equitable remedy. In challenging the liability finding, the appellant argues the judge erred in concluding that the respondent’s opportunity was to purchase, rather than use the parcel of land. The respondent challenges the remedy decision on the cross appeal, arguing the judge made a number of errors in refusing to impose a constructive trust and in awarding equitable compensation instead.
Held: Appeal and cross appeal dismissed. On the appeal, the judge did not err in characterizing the respondent’s opportunity as one to purchase rather than use the lands in question. On the cross appeal, he was not bound to impose a gains-based remedy because the appellant obtained a gain from his breach. Instead, the decision about choice of remedy is discretionary. The judge did not err in exercising his discretion by awarding equitable compensation in the amount he did.
more ...
|
Posted Monday, December 22, 2025:
Behnke v. Pannu,
2025 BCCA 456
–
2025/12/22
Court of Appeal
In reasons indexed at 2025 BCCA 182, the Court dismissed the appeal and cross appeal from a judgment awarding damages for injuries suffered in two motor vehicle accidents. The parties were unable to agree on the order for costs. Mr. Behnke, the appellant in the appeal and defendant in the court below, submits that the general rule should be followed and seeks an order that each party recover the costs of their appeal from the opposing party and that the costs of the appeal and the cross-appeal be set off. Mr. Pannu, the respondent in the appeal and plaintiff in the court below, submits that he should recover costs of the appeal and that each party should bear their own costs of the cross-appeal. Held: Mr. Pannu is awarded 75% of his costs of the appeal, and each party shall bear their own costs of the cross-appeal. On the appeal, Mr. Behnke raised a multiplicity of issues, while the cross-appeal was narrow and focused. The vast majority of time and effort spent by the parties in preparing and presenting the appeal and the cross-appeal related solely to the issues raised on the appeal. Mr. Pannu clearly achieved substantial success if the appeal and the cross-appeal are viewed together. This was an appropriate case to depart from the general rule.
more ...
|
R. v. Townsend,
2025 BCCA 459
–
2025/12/22
Court of Appeal
The appellant challenges his conviction for sexual assault arguing that the trial judge erred: (1) in his assessment of the complainant’s evidence by disregarding a flaw in her description of the sexual interaction by impermissibly speculating about the parties’ flexibility, and by relying on the accused’s post-offence demeanor as corroborative of the complainant’s version of events, effectively establishing the appellant’s guilt; and (2) in his assessment of the accused’s evidence by misapprehending his evidence, and in failing to properly assess the importance of corroboration to the appellant’s credibility and/or applying uneven scrutiny to his evidence.
Held: Appeal allowed. The trial judge committed a legal error in improperly relying on the accused’s post-offence conduct in drawing an inference of guilt without considering other explanations for the conduct. As the Crown did not rely on the curative provision, the presumption of prejudice was not rebutted.
more ...
|
Email page
Print page