This website uses cookies to various ends, as detailed in our Privacy Policy. You may accept all these cookies or choose only those categories of cookies that are acceptable to you.

Loading paragraph markers

D’Acquigney v. Resthaven Residences Ltd., 2022 BCPC 242 (CanLII)

Date:
2022-11-02
File number:
220254
Citation:
D’Acquigney v. Resthaven Residences Ltd., 2022 BCPC 242 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/jsrs1>, retrieved on 2024-04-25

Citation:

D’Acquigney v. Resthaven Residences Ltd.

 

2022 BCPC 242 

Date:

20221102

File No:

220254

Registry:

Victoria

 

IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

     

 

 

 

BETWEEN:

DEBORAH HEATHER D'ACQUIGNEY

CLAIMANT

 

 

AND:

RESTHAVEN RESIDENCES LTD.

and

DAVID VIDALIN

DEFENDANT

 

 

 

     

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

OF THE

HONOURABLE JUDGE GOUGE



 

Appearing in person:

Ms. D'Acquigney

Counsel for the Defendant:

J. Aiyadurai

Place of Hearing:

Victoria, B.C.

Date of Hearing:

October 3, 2022

Date of Judgment:

November 2, 2022

 

                                                                                                                                                           

                                                                                                                                                           


[1]         Ms. D’Acquigney seeks to appeal to this court from a decision of the Civil Resolution Tribunal (“the CRT”). The CRT decision was rendered on June 22, 2022.

[2]         Prior to June, 2022, a party to a proceeding before the CRT who wished to appeal a CRT decision was entitled to file a notice of objection in the registry of this court. If the notice of objection was filed and served within the time limited by the statute, the decision was rendered void by the statute and the parties were required to try the issue de novo in this court. However, those provisions of the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act were repealed on June 6, 2022. Since June 6, 2022, the only appellate procedure permitted by the statute is an application for judicial review. That application can be made only to the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

[3]         Ms. D’Acquigney relies upon sections 35 – 36 of the Interpretation Act. However, those sections do not support the position which she advances. In particular, sections 36(1)(b) and 36(1)(c) expressly provide that, when a procedural enactment is amended, any proceeding commenced before the amendment must be continued, so far as is practical, under the new procedure enacted by the amendment.

[4]         Accordingly, this court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate Ms. D’Aquigney’s appeal. The only appellate process open to her is a judicial review in the Supreme Court.

 

November 2, 2022

 

 

_____________________________

The Honourable Judge Gouge

Provincial Court of British Columbia