In today’s housing market, it is increasingly common for parents to help their children financially when buying a home. Although the parent’s intention—whether the funds are meant as a gift or a loan—may be clear at the outset, circumstances such as death or changing family relationships can create uncertainty over time. This is why proper documentation is essential. Clear records protect all involved and preserve family relationships by preventing misunderstandings down the road.

Understanding the Legal Presumption

When a parent transfers money to an adult child without receiving anything in return, the law generally presumes that the transfer is not a gift but is instead held on trust by the child for the parent.

This is because the law presumes bargains, not gifts to adult independent children. In other words, while the child may have legal ownership of the money, the parent is considered the beneficial owner.

This is called the presumption of resulting trust. It applies unless evidence shows that the transfer was intended as a gift.

The presumption can lead to complications if a dispute arises later, particularly when there is no clear record of what the transferring parent intended (gift versus loan) at the time of the transfer.

Making Your Intentions Clear

To avoid confusion and potential disputes, it is critical to establish, from the outset, whether the money is intended as a gift or a loan. If the parent intends the funds to be a loan, certain steps should be taken to document this clearly:

  1. Create a Written Loan Agreement: Courts focus on the intention of the parent at the time of the transfer. A written document illustrating the parent’s intention, prepared contemporaneously with the transfer of funds, provides the strongest evidence of this intent.
  2. Specify Repayment Terms: The loan agreement should outline the terms of repayment, including any interest, schedule of payments, and consequences of default. Even a simple repayment plan reduces ambiguity as it demonstrates the expectation of repayment.
  3. Keep Documentation Accessible: Retain copies of the loan agreement, bank transfers, and any correspondence discussing the loan. This documentation can be invaluable if disagreements arise later.

If the funds are intended as a gift, it is equally important to document that intent. A simple Deed of Gift, gift letter or other written declaration can help to evidence the intention of the parent to give the money with no expectation of repayment. This protects both parties and can be used to rebut the legal presumption of resulting trust.

Common Pitfalls

Problems most often occur when nothing is documented at the time of transfer of funds. What begins as a clear oral agreement can become muddled over the years, especially as family dynamics shift – for example, if the child separates from a partner, if siblings become involved, if the parent’s financial situation changes or if someone dies.

Without clear evidence, one party may later claim that the funds were a gift, while the other insists they were a loan. This can lead to costly legal battles and lasting strain on family relationships.

Final Thoughts

Providing financial assistance to family members can be a generous and helpful gesture, but it comes with potential legal and relational complexities. By clearly documenting gifts or loans (specifying repayment terms), and keeping thorough records, parents can protect their interests and maintain harmony within the family. Clear communication and proper documentation ensure that everyone understands the nature of the transaction, preventing misunderstandings down the road.

If you are considering providing financial help to a child or another family member, it’s important to make sure your intentions are clearly documented. The lawyers at Heath Law LLP in Nanaimo can guide you through preparing a loan agreement or gift documentation to protect both your interests and your family relationships. Contact us today to schedule a consultation.

In real estate transactions, parties rely on the information provided by one another to form a clear understanding of the deal.

Mutual trust and honest communication are essential for meaningful engagement among all involved. The act of misrepresentation, whether through a false statement or the omission of a material fact, undermines that trust. Misrepresentation can significantly influence a party’s decision and expose the other to serious legal consequences.

A recent decision, Sewell v. Abadian, a 2025 British Columbia Court of Appeal ruling, illustrates how courts in BC address the issue of misrepresentation by omission.

In Sewell, the seller, a former realtor, failed to disclose in the disclosure statement that an addition to the home did not have a permit, even though it was known to him. He crossed out relevant sections of the disclosure statement stating only that he had not lived in the home himself. The Court concluded that the buyer had reasonably relied on the seller to disclose everything he knew about the property. By crossing out parts of the disclosure statement, the buyer believed the seller was indicating he was unaware of the answers to those questions.

The seller’s omission was found to constitute misrepresentation, entitling the buyer to rescind the deal and recover a $300,000 deposit. The Sewell decision reinforces the legal and ethical responsibility of full disclosure in real estate transactions. It makes clear that silence or selective omission can amount to misrepresentation with serious consequences, and that courts will scrutinize attempts to obscure or withhold material information.

For anyone involved in real estate, this case underscores the importance of transparency and the potential risks of failing to disclose known issues.

In real estate transactions, buyers rely on information provided by the sellers and their realtors to make informed decisions.

Practices like phantom bidding, where false or non-existent offers are alluded to in order to create a sense of competition, undermine that trust. This deceptive tactic misrepresents the actual interest in a property, manipulating buyers into making higher offers based on misleading information. Such behavior erodes the integrity of the transaction and can damage the credibility of those involved. Tran v. Brickman, a recent 2025 Ontario Superior Court decision illustrates how courts in Canada address issues of misrepresentation.

The seller in Tran fabricated offers, falsely communicating to the only buyer that there were other offers in play. To complete the deal, the buyer would have to increase their offer. The court found that these offers, allegedly made by other parties, were nothing more than “oral puffery.” They were not valid under Ontario’s real estate regulations, which require offers to be in writing.

As a result, these were found to be phantom bids.

The buyer was awarded $28,600 in damages under the loss of opportunity doctrine, recognizing the buyer’s lost chance to negotiate fairly. The ruling reinforced that offers must comply with real estate regulations or they could be seen as phantom bids in Ontario, leading to misrepresentation.

Ontario has taken steps to regulate phantom bidding, including rule changes in 2015 and increased enforcement. British Columbia has seen fewer formal complaints and has therefore not adopted similar regulations, instead continuing to rely upon existing ethical standards. The case law in British Columbia on phantom bidding is limited, however, there are signs of growing attention to the issue. In July 2023, real estate boards across British Columbia’s lower mainland introduced the Disclosure of Multiple Offers Presented form.

This form requires listing agents to disclose the number of offers and brokerages involved, enhancing transparency and aiming to boost buyer confidence in competitive offer situations. Transparency does remain limited, as actual offer details remain hidden.

While not a direct response to phantom bidding, it is a clear step toward increased accountability in offer presentation.

 

What is the Home Flipping Tax and how does it affect you?

As of January 1, 2025, British Columbia’s Residential Property (Short-Term Holding) Profit Tax Act, commonly known as the Home Flipping Tax, came into effect. The tax targets speculative real estate activity by taxing profits from the sale of residential properties held for less than 730 days. The tax applies not just to physical properties but also to the assignment of pre-sale contracts and includes individuals, corporations, trusts, and partnerships.

If you sell a property within 365 days of buying it, you will pay 20 percent tax on the profit. If you sell between 366 and 730 days, the tax rate gradually decreases to zero by day 730 determined by the following formula:

The profit is calculated as the sale price minus the purchase price and any improvement costs. A deduction of up to $20,000 is available if you lived in the home as your primary residence for at least 365 days. This deduction does not apply to pre-sale assignments.

There are exemptions. Some people and organizations do not need to pay or file, including charities, Indigenous nations, non-profits, and government organizations. Other exemptions, such as those for death, divorce, illness, job loss, or relocation, still require you to file a return but may reduce or eliminate the tax owed. Builders and developers will also be exempt if the property was held for construction or development.

Anyone who sells a property within two years must file a return within 90 days of the sale, even if they qualify for an exemption. Failure to file can lead to penalties.

TL;DR:

Who Does It Apply To?

  • Individuals, corporations, trusts, and partnerships
  • Sales of physical properties and assignment of pre-sale contracts

How Much Is the Tax?

  • 20% tax on profit if you sell within 365 days of purchase
  • Gradually decreases to 0% by day 730
  • Profit = Sale price – Purchase price – Improvement costs
  • Up to $20,000 deduction if the home was your primary residence for at least 365 days (does not apply to pre-sale assignments)

Are There Exemptions?

Yes, but you may still need to file:

  • Full exemptions (no tax, no filing): Charities, Indigenous nations, non-profits, government organizations
  • File required, possible reduction/elimination of tax: Death, divorce, illness, job loss, relocation
  • Builders/developers are exempt if the property was held for construction or development

Filing Requirements

  • If you sell within two years, you must file a return within 90 days of the sale, even if exempt.
  • Failure to file can result in penalties.

If you are selling or assigning property in 2025 or later,  you should seek a professional tax advisor or contact us for legal advice to understand the consequences and requirements of such transactions.

Understanding Estate Obligations for Committees in B.C. Incapacity Cases

When someone becomes incapable of managing their own affairs, a court in British Columbia may appoint a committee under the Patients Property Act, RSBC 1996, c 349. This fiduciary role is often misunderstood — particularly when it is compared to the duties of executors or trustees who have Power of Attorney.

While a trustee or executor is expected to manage or distribute an estate with a focus on maximizing value for beneficiaries, a committee operates under a very different standard. Their responsibility is to the incapable person alone, and any management of the patient’s estate is generally undertaken only insofar as it benefits the patient. The committee’s relationship to the estate is therefore indirect: it exists only through the lens of the patient’s best interests, not out of any obligation to grow the estate for heirs.

Section 18: A Duty to the Patient First and Foremost

Section 18(1) of the Patients Property Act says:

“A committee must exercise the committee’s powers for the benefit of the patient and the patient’s family, having regard to the nature and value of the property of the patient and the circumstances and needs of the patient and the patient’s family.”

At first glance, this provision might suggest a balancing act between the interests of the patient and their broader family. But British Columbia courts have consistently interpreted the language of section 18 in a way that centres the incapable person, not their heirs. The reference to “the patient’s family” does not impose a duty to future beneficiaries, nor does it require the committee to preserve or enhance the value of the estate for eventual distribution.

Instead, the “family” language has been treated as a recognition that some decisions may have collateral benefits for family members — such as supporting a dependent child or spouse — but only when those benefits align with the patient’s own needs and welfare. Committees are fiduciaries to the patient, not fiduciaries of the estate, and not agents of the family.

This interpretation was affirmed in British Columbia (Public Trustee) v. Bradley Estate, 2000 BCCA 78. In that case, the Court of Appeal rejected a proposal to restructure a patient’s estate for tax purposes in a way that would benefit his children after death. Even though the plan would have saved on U.S. estate taxes and arguably preserved more wealth, it was found to be incompatible with the committee’s duty because it would materially reduce the estate during the patient’s lifetime without delivering any personal benefit to him. The court held that committees may only reduce the estate if doing so genuinely serves the patient’s welfare. There is no authority to take financial risks or restructure the estate solely to favour eventual beneficiaries (paras 15–20).

This principle was reaffirmed — and clarified — in Uhlving Estate v. Public Guardian and Trustee, 2024 BCCA 397. There, the Public Guardian and Trustee declined to pursue a WESA wills variation claim on behalf of an incapable widow, even though a successful claim would have increased the size of her estate for her adult children. The court upheld this decision, emphasizing that the committee’s statutory duty does not authorize litigation that exposes the patient’s assets to risk unless the litigation is directly linked to improving the patient’s own financial position or care. Justice Grauer wrote:

“A statute aimed at the protection of vulnerable persons… cannot authorize a committee to act in a way that would jeopardize the patient’s continued care and maintenance when the only consequence would be to materially benefit a legally unrelated third party.” (Uhlving, at para 54)

While a committee must be mindful of the family’s needs in situations where the patient’s support obligations persist — for example, to a dependent spouse or child — these are exceptions grounded in the patient’s own obligations and well-being. The core principle remains: the estate is a resource for the patient, not an inheritance to be grown for others.

By contrast, an executor or trustee is specifically tasked with managing and preserving an estate for the benefit of named beneficiaries or classes of heirs. Their role includes identifying tax efficiencies, recovering debts owed to the estate, and maximizing value for distribution. A committee, however, cannot simply do what’s best for the estate. They must ask: does this decision benefit the patient, directly and meaningfully, during their lifetime? If the answer is no, the action should likely not be taken — even if the patient’s family might stand to gain.

What If There’s Truly No Impact on the Patient?

The core legal position is this: committees are not neutral stewards of the estate. Their powers are exercised through the prism of the patient’s benefit — not for the estate’s general preservation, and certainly not to increase the share left to others.

So, even where a decision is costless or low-risk (e.g., pursuing a simple claim, amending a will, or changing asset structure), courts have been reluctant to allow committees to act purely to benefit others, unless:

  • The patient gains some tangible or intangible benefit (e.g., peace of mind, maintaining long-standing family expectations, or avoiding conflict);
  • The action aligns with the patient’s known wishes, expressed prior to incapacity;
  • There is no financial, reputational, or practical risk to the patient or their care; and
  • The action is objectively reasonable under the standard of a “prudent person of business.”

But even under those circumstances, caution prevails. If there is a chance the decision could be interpreted as self-dealing or as exceeding the scope of authority, courts will tend to side with inaction. That is, committees should be risk-averse, even inactionist, when the benefit is external and the internal justification is weak.

Conclusion: Duty First, Legacy Second

Committees are not custodians of inheritance. Their duty is not to secure windfalls for beneficiaries, but to make careful, prudent decisions that protect the welfare of the patient during their lifetime. While trustees and executors look to the future — preserving and maximizing assets for others — committees look primarily to the present, with one question in mind: What serves the best interests of the person I am appointed to protect?

If you have been appointed as a committee, or are navigating questions about estate planning and incapacity, our team can help you understand your legal obligations and protect both your loved one’s interests and your own.

Contact Heath Law today. or read more of our blog articles about Trusts and Estate Law.

Many professionals are choosing to structure their services through a corporation, often working as independent contractors rather than direct employees. This approach can offer significant tax benefits that surpass the limited options available to employees. However, before jumping into incorporation, it’s crucial to understand the potential tax consequences, especially if you’re providing services to an entity that would otherwise employ you directly.

Employee vs. Independent Contractor

The key to determining whether you’re an employee or an independent contractor lies in whether you’re running your own business or simply working for an employer.

Here are some factors to consider:

1. Intention: What was the original agreement or understanding between you and the company?

2. Control: How much control does the company have over how and when you work?

3. Equipment: Do you supply your own tools and equipment, or does the company provide them?

4. Financial Risk: Are you taking on financial risk, like investing in equipment or covering expenses?

5. Opportunity to Profit: Do you have a chance to earn extra income based on your performance and efficiency?

Understanding the Tax Implications

Incorporating your business can offer tax advantages, but it also comes with important considerations. The Income Tax Act has rules to prevent tax avoidance through incorporation. A significant provision is the Anti-Avoidance Rule, which applies if you incorporate your business to provide services that would normally be done as an employee. In such cases, your corporation might be categorized as a personal service business.

Personal Service Business: What You Need to Know

If classified as a personal service business, you’ll face several tax disadvantages:

1. Restricted Deductions: You’ll have limited ability to deduct common business expenses like office supplies, travel, meals, and phone bills.

2. Loss of Small Business Deduction: You won’t be eligible for the small business deduction, which usually provides a lower tax rate.

3. Higher Tax Rate: Personal service businesses are subject to a higher tax rate—specifically 5% of the corporation’s taxable income for the year.

Conclusion

If you’re considering incorporating as an independent contractor, please contact Heath Law to book and appointment with one of our lawyers for legal advice and seek out a tax professional to avoid unexpected tax issues.

 

What is Unjust Enrichment?

Unjust enrichment occurs when a party confers a benefit upon another party without receiving the proper restitution required by law. Unjust enrichment is a strict liability and faultless claim, meaning the plaintiff will only get back exactly what was transferred. The principle aims to reverse an unjustified transfer and restore the parties to their pre-enrichment status.

The Elements of a Successful Unjust Enrichment Claim

To successfully claim unjust enrichment, three key elements must be satisfied:

  1. Objective Benefit to the Defendant: The defendant must have received a benefit, which can be anything of value, such as money, services, or property.
  2. Corresponding Deprivation to the Plaintiff: The plaintiff must have suffered a loss or deprivation as a result of the benefit conferred on the defendant.
  3. Absence of a Juristic Reason: There must be no legal justification for the defendant’s retention of the benefit. In other words, the benefit received by the defendant cannot be justified by a contract, a gift, or a legal obligation.

Defences Against Unjust Enrichment Claims

There are several defences that a defendant might use to counter a claim of unjust enrichment:

1. Subjective Devaluation: This defence may defeat the first element of the unjust enrichment claim when the defendant did not have a choice in accepting the benefit. More specifically, when the defendant did not voluntarily choose to assume financial responsibility for the benefit.

Rebutting Subjective Devaluation: The plaintiff can rebut the subjective devaluation if:

  • The defendant requested or accepted the benefit with knowledge of the expectation of payment.
  • The benefit was readily returnable, and the defendant did not return the benefit to the plaintiff.
  • The defendant has received an incontrovertible benefit such as money, realized financial gain, or the saving of a necessary expense.

2. Change of Position: This defence applies if the defendant has spent or used the benefit they received in a way that means they no longer have it. To use this defence successfully, the defendant must prove:

    • Extraordinary Expenditure: The benefit was spent on something unusual or special, not regular expenses—for example, buying concert tickets instead of paying a credit card bill.
    • Relying on the Benefit: The defendant only spent the benefit because they believed they were entitled to it. For instance, they bought the concert tickets because they thought the benefit was theirs to keep.
    • Good Faith: The defendant must show they acted honestly. If they knew they weren’t entitled to the benefit, they couldn’t use this defence.

3. Public Policy and Reasonable Expectations: In some cases, the defendant may argue that retaining the benefit aligns with public policy or reasonable expectations. This defence is evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Conclusion
Unjust enrichment is a complex area of law aimed at ensuring fairness when one party unfairly benefits at another’s expense. Whether you’re pursuing a claim or defending against one, grasping these principles is crucial to achieving a fair resolution.

If you suspect you’ve been subjected to a case of Unjust Enrichment and would like to book an appointment with one of our lawyers, call 1-866-753-2202 or drop us an email.

Divorce is a challenging experience at any stage of life, but for those over 50, it brings unique complexities. “Grey divorce,” a term describing couples aged 50 and older ending their marriages, has become more common in Canada. This blog explores the reasons behind this trend, the specific challenges faced by individuals going through a grey divorce, and offers advice on navigating this life-changing event.

Grey divorce has seen a significant rise over the past few decades. Statistics Canada reports that while the overall divorce rate has stabilized or even declined in some age groups, it has increased by 26% for those 50 years of age and older. Several factors contribute to this trend, which include increased life expectancy, changing social norms, increased financial independence, and the increase in average age at marriage.

Grey divorce presents unique challenges that can be more complex compared to divorces at younger ages. Here are some key issues:

Financial Considerations

1. Division of Assets: Couples who have been married for decades often have significant shared assets, including property, investments, and retirement savings. Dividing these can be contentious and complicated.

2. Retirement Planning: Divorce can disrupt retirement plans, leading to concerns about maintaining financial stability in later years. It’s crucial to reassess financial goals and create a new retirement plan post-divorce.

3. Spousal Support: Given the long duration of many grey marriages, spousal support may be a significant issue, especially if one partner was the primary breadwinner.

Emotional and Social Impact

1. Loneliness and Isolation: After a long marriage, the prospect of living alone can be daunting. Rebuilding a social life and finding new support networks is essential.

2. Impact on Adult Children: Even though the children of grey divorcees are usually adults, they can still experience emotional turmoil. They may also face practical concerns, such as how holidays will be spent or how to support aging parents.

Health Concerns

1. Physical and Mental Health: The stress of divorce can exacerbate health problems, both physical and mental. Older adults need to prioritize their health and seek support when needed.

2. Healthcare Decisions: Couples often share healthcare plans and decision-making responsibilities. Divorce necessitates new arrangements, which can be complex and require careful planning.

Navigating Grey Divorce: Tips and Advice

Navigating a grey divorce requires careful planning and support. First, consult a family lawyer and financial advisor to address legal and financial complexities. Prioritize self-care by engaging in activities that bring joy and relaxation, and consider therapy or support groups for emotional well-being. Rebuild your social life by reaching out to friends, family, and new communities. Finally, set new goals for your future, embracing the opportunity for personal growth and fulfillment.

Conclusion

Grey divorce, while challenging, also offers an opportunity for personal growth and a fresh start. By understanding the unique issues involved and seeking appropriate support, individuals can navigate this transition and find fulfillment in their later years.

If you’re considering or going through a grey divorce in British Columbia, remember that you are not alone, and resources are available to help you through this journey.

Does Litigation Privilege Apply to Communications Amongst the Board of Directors?

Litigation privilege prevents a party to litigation from having to disclose documents that were made in anticipation of or for the purpose of litigation. Litigation privilege ensures the efficacy of Canada’s adversarial process by giving parties a “zone of privacy” to conduct investigations and prepare for litigation.[1]

While solicitor-client privilege is broader in scope, litigation privilege is distinct in that it is not limited to confidential communications between a solicitor and client. Litigation privilege does not require a solicitor to be a party to the communications whatsoever. However, the courts have noted that litigation privilege, in comparison to solicitor-client privilege, is “less absolute, more fact-driven and subject to challenge.”[2]

A pertinent question then arises: does litigation privilege protect communications among directors of a corporation or society?

Litigation Privilege Criteria

The short answer is it depends. For litigation privilege to apply, the party asserting privilege must establish for each document over which privilege is being claimed:

(1) that litigation was ongoing or was reasonably contemplated at the time the document was created; and

(2) that the dominant purpose of creating the document was to prepare for that litigation.[3]

The two-prong test is objectively assessed, meaning very little consideration is given to the party’s subjective thoughts. The first prong of the test is assessed by asking: “Would a reasonable person being aware of the circumstances conclude that the claim will not likely be resolved without litigation?”[4] The analysis of the second prong is fact-driven, focusing on the surrounding circumstances in which the document was created.[5] Considerations in this analysis include “when [the document] was created, who created it, …and what use was or could be made of it.”[6]

How to Protect Directors’ Correspondence

If directors intend to rely on litigation privilege to protect their correspondence, they must ensure that the documents are created in the face of litigation, and that the dominant purpose of the documents is for the impending litigation. It is prudent practice for directors to specify that the dominant purpose of the document is for litigation. Additionally, directors should avoid including disparaging or irrelevant comments in the correspondence to maintain the dominant purpose of litigation.

[1] Blank v Canada (Minister of Justice), 2006 SCC 39 at paras. 27 and 34.
[2] Stone v Ellerman, 2009 BCCA 294 at para. 27.
[3] Gichuru v British Columbia (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2014 BCCA 259 at para. 32.
[4] Raj v Khosravi, 2015 BCCA 49 at para. 11.
[5] Ibid, at para. 17.
[6] Birring Development Co. Ltd. v Binpal, 2021 BCSC 1298 at para. 31.

 

Contact Heath Law in Nanaimo for any questions.

How the Home Buyer Rescission Period Protects You in BC Real Estate Transactions

Buying a home is a significant financial commitment, and sometimes, decisions made in the heat of the moment can lead to buyer’s remorse. Recognizing this, British Columbia has implemented a Home Buyer Rescission Period (“HBRP”) to offer buyers a safety net. Here’s what you need to know about this essential protection mechanism.

What is the Home Buyer Rescission Period?

The HBRP, often referred to as a “cooling-off period,” is a statutory timeframe during which home buyers can back out of a purchase agreement without incurring severe penalties. This period aims to give buyers the chance to reconsider their decision, seek additional advice, or conduct further due diligence. Further, parties to a real estate transaction cannot waive the right to rescind within the HBRP.

Key Features of the Home Buyer Rescission Period

  1. Duration: The HBRP lasts for three business days. This period begins the day after the buyer’s offer is accepted by the seller.
  2. Scope: The HBRP applies to most residential real estate transactions, including detached homes, townhouses, apartments and condominiums. However, the HBRP does not apply to transactions of real property on leased lands, leasehold interests, property sold at auction, property sold under a court order or the supervision of the court, or property under section 21 of the Real Estate Development and Marketing Act. Further, the HBRP does not provide the right to rescind once title of the property has been transferred from the seller to the buyer.
  3. Notice Requirement: If a buyer decides to rescind their offer, they must notify the seller in writing within the rescission period. The notice must include the identification of the property, the buyer’s name and signature, the seller’s name, and the date that the right of rescission is being exercised.
  4. Costs: Exercising the right to rescind is not entirely free. Buyers who rescind their accepted offer are required to pay the seller 0.25% of the agreed-upon purchase price. If a deposit has been paid, this amount can be paid from the deposit, with the remainder of the deposit to be returned to the buyer. This payment helps compensate the seller for the inconvenience and potential loss of opportunity.

The HBRP is a crucial consumer protection measure. It provides buyers with the time to conduct thorough inspections, secure financing, seek professional advice, and avoid impulsive decisions.

If you are considering purchasing a new residence, visit our FAQ page for definitions, and explore our blogs on real estate law or homeowner liability. Additionally, contact us for assistance in updating your will and trust after your new purchase. For more information, check out our Wills & Estate Law blogs.