Rochon v. British Columbia, 2007 BCSC 1060(CanLII)

29) quoted the Law Reform Commission

(30) With respect to the identity of the Crown, the Commission wrote at page 9:

The word “Crown” may be confusing to some. In law, the Crown is a term of art, the meaning of which bears little resemblance to the chattel that sits in the Tower of London to be gazed at by sightseers. The “Crown” is a description for Her Majesty Elizabeth II in her legal personage as Sovereign.

B.C. Fed. Of Lab. v. W.C.B. (B.C.), 1988 CanLII 2855 (BC SC)


Is your matter "justifiable" .......judicial discretion 1. Whether the petitioners have standing to bring these proceedings [4] Two different tests for standing exist: the general test for standing and the public interest standing. [5] Prior to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Finlay v. Can. (Min. of Fin.), 1986 CanLII 6 (SCC), [1986] 2 S.C.R. 607, [1987] 1 W.W.R. 603, 23 Admin, L.R. 197, 17 C.P.C. (2d) 289, 33 D.L.R. (4th) 321, 8 C.H.R.R. D/3789, 71 N.R. 338,

a plaintiff attempting to challenge the exercise of statutory authority had to fulfil the general requirements for standing. A plaintiff or petitioner had to show either that the interference with the public right was such that some private right of his was interfered with or that he suffered special damage in respect of his public right.

McLeod Lake Indian Band Trust Agreement (Re), 2010 BCSC 1158


[8] At common law, the beneficiaries of a trust may vary the terms of the trust if they are sui juris (having full capacity) and are the only persons entitled to the trust property: Saunders v. Vautier (1841), Cr. & P. 240, 41 E.R. 482. However, that is not permitted where the beneficiaries include unborn persons, minors or adults lacking capacity.

Gellen v. Public Guardian and Trustee of British Columbia et al, 2005 BCSC 1615


The British Columbia Court of Appeal’s decision in Buschau v. Rogers Communications Inc. (2004), 2004 BCCA 80 (CanLII), 24 B.C.L.R. (4th) 85 (B.C.C.A.) made it clear that this court has no jurisdiction to make an order under the s. 1 of the Act on behalf of any adult person with even a remote interest in the subject matter of a trust. Newbury J.A. speaking for the Court stated at para. 99:

Ford Credit Canada Ltd. v. Canada (Deputy Minister of National Revenue), 1994 CanLII 1782 (BC SC)


Is the English Bill of Rights (1688) part of the law of Canada? There are two ways that English statute and common law became part of Canadian law. The traditional method occurred when English speaking settlers arrived in North America. A more recent idea provides for the introduction of English constitutional law into Canadian constitutional law by reason of the preamble to the Constitution Act 1867. I will deal with them in that order.

It is helpful to examine the way in which English law came into the province of B.C. as compared to how it became part of Canadian constitutional law.
When English speaking settlers first came to Canada, English law became part of the law of the Canadian English speaking colonies and later of those provinces. The adoption of English statute and common law by English settlers of an uninhabited country is articulated by Blackstone in his commentaries, i 104:

Municipal Jurisdictions

Not Complete

Contact Us

  sales@omnipotence.ca

  support@omnipotence.ca

  webmaster@omnipotence.ca

Follow us

omnipotence 180216

Sustainable Self Determination!

Community, Collaboration, Organization, Success!

Private Members Only