Ganges Kangro Properties Ltd. v. Shepard,

• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Judge: Kirkpatrick, Garson and Goepel, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Citation: (2015), 380 B.C.A.C. 269 (CA),2015 BCCA 522
• Date: 04 November 2015

Ganges Kangro Prop. v. Shepard (2015), 380 B.C.A.C. 269 (CA);

    655 W.A.C. 269

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] B.C.A.C. TBEd. JA.020

Ganges Kangro Properties Ltd. (respondent/plaintiff) v. Michael Phillip Shepard (appellant/defendant)

(CA42012; 2015 BCCA 522)

Indexed As: Ganges Kangro Properties Ltd. v. Shepard

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Kirkpatrick, Garson and Goepel, JJ.A.

December 21, 2015.

Summary:

The parties entered into an agreement of purchase and sale respecting a residential property. The day before closing, the purchaser advised the vendor that he would not complete the transaction on the basis that there was an undisclosed flooding risk arising from a dam that was alleged to encroach on the property. The vendor sued the purchaser for breach of contract.

The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at [2014] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1326, found that the dam was not a latent defect and awarded the vendor damages of $51,504.79. The purchaser appealed, arguing that the judge erred by (1) arbitrarily rejecting the expert opinion evidence that he tendered; and (2) relying on inadmissible hearsay and opinion evidence.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Courts - Topic 583

Judges - Duties - Re reasons for decisions (incl. notes) - See paragraphs 36 to 59.

Evidence - Topic 7002

Opinion evidence - Expert evidence - General - Acceptance, rejection and weight to be given to expert opinion - See paragraphs 36 to 59.

Evidence - Topic 7010

Opinion evidence - Expert evidence - General - Admissibility of information used to support opinion - See paragraphs 62 to 67.

Evidence - Topic 7073

Opinion evidence - Reports by experts - Use of - See paragraphs 62 to 67.

Evidence - Topic 7112

Opinion evidence - Nonexpert evidence - Admissibility - See paragraphs 68 to 89.

Practice - Topic 8803

Appeals - General principles - Whether trial judge must give reasons for rejecting evidence or for credibility findings - See paragraphs 36 to 59.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Mohan, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 9; 166 N.R. 245; 71 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 39].

Abbott and Haliburton Co. Ltd. et al. v. WBLI Chartered Accountants, [2015] 2 S.C.R. 182; 470 N.R. 324; 360 N.S.R.(2d) 1; 1135 A.P.R. 1; 2015 SCC 23, refd to. [para. 40].

Buctouche First Nation v. New Brunswick - see Simon et al. v. New Brunswick et al.

Simon et al. v. New Brunswick et al. (2014), 426 N.B.R.(2d) 304; 1110 A.P.R. 304 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 41].

R. v. Abbey (W.N.) (2009), 254 O.A.C. 9; 2009 ONCA 624, leave to appeal refused (2010), 409 N.R. 397; 276 O.A.C. 398 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Gagnon (L.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 621; 347 N.R. 355; 2006 SCC 17, refd to. [para. 48].

Hill et al. v. Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board et al., [2007] 3 S.C.R. 129; 368 N.R. 1; 230 O.A.C. 260; 2007 SCC 41, refd to. [para. 48].

Faryna v. Chorny, [1952] 2 D.L.R. 354 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 48].

Chancery Estate Holdings Corp. et al. v. Sahara Real Estate Investment Inc. et al. (2013), 335 B.C.A.C. 225; 573 W.A.C. 225; 2013 BCCA 145, refd to. [para. 48].

Jampolsky v. Shattler (2015), 367 B.C.A.C. 311; 631 W.A.C. 311; 2015 BCCA 87, refd to. [para. 49].

D.C. Gem Craft Inc. v. Pafco Insurance Co. (1998), 111 O.A.C. 330; 40 O.R.(3d) 218 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 49].

R. v. Molodowic (A.J.), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 420; 252 N.R. 250; 145 Man.R.(2d) 201; 218 W.A.C. 201; 2000 SCC 16, refd to. [para. 50].

Wafler v. Trinh (2014), 355 B.C.A.C. 55; 607 W.A.C. 55; 2014 BCCA 95, refd to. [para. 50].

Savinkoff v. Seggewiss (1996), 77 B.C.A.C. 98; 126 W.A.C. 98; 25 B.C.L.R.(3d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 51].

Hanke v. Resurfice Corp. et al., [2007] 1 S.C.R. 333; 357 N.R. 175; 404 A.R. 333; 394 W.A.C. 333; 2007 SCC 7, refd to. [para. 52].

K.V.P. v. T.E., [2001] 2 S.C.R. 1014; 275 N.R. 52; 156 B.C.A.C. 161; 255 W.A.C. 161; 2001 SCC 60, refd to. [para. 53].

R. v. D.D., [2000] 2 S.C.R. 275; 259 N.R. 156; 136 O.A.C. 201; 2000 SCC 43, refd to. [para. 69].

R. v. Graat, [1982] 2 S.C.R. 819; 45 N.R. 451, refd to. [para. 70].

Counsel:

A.M. Gunn, Q.C., for the appellant;

J.A. Jaffer and B. Brock, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard at Vancouver, B.C., on November 4, 2015, before Kirkpatrick, Garson and Goepel, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Kirkpatrick, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the court on December 21, 2015.