Staufen v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [2001] B.C.T.C. 779 (SC)

• Judge: Scarth, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
• Case Date: May 16, 2001
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: [2001] B.C.T.C. 779 (SC);2001 BCSC 779

Staufen v. B.C. (A.G.), [2001] B.C.T.C. 779 (SC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] B.C.T.C. TBEd. JN.072

Philip Staufen (petitioner) v. The Attorney General of British Columbia (respondent)

(L010409; 2001 BCSC 779)

Indexed As: Staufen v. British Columbia (Attorney General)

British Columbia Supreme Court

Vancouver

Scarth, J.

May 29, 2001.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Courts - Topic 2005.1

Jurisdiction - General principles - Remedies based on legal fictions.

Names - Topic 345

Vital statistics - Birth certificate - Issuance of - Factual basis.

Cases Noticed:

Calvin's Case (1688), 7 Co. Rep. 1; 77 E.R. 377, refd to. [para. 12].

Beson et al. v. Director of Child Welfare (Nfld.), [1982] 2 S.C.R. 716; 44 N.R. 602; 39 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 246; 111 A.P.R. 246, refd to. [para. 16].

Eve, Re, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 388; 71 N.R. 1; 61 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 273; 185 A.P.R. 273, refd to. [para. 17].

Mrs. E. v. Eve - see Eve, Re.

D.W.T. v. British Columbia (Attorney General) et al. (2001), 152 B.C.A.C. 243; 250 W.A.C. 243 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

Jackson v. Jackson, [1960] 3 All E.R. 621 (P.D. & A.), refd to. [para. 29].

Statutes Noticed:

Vital Statistics Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 479, sect. 8 [para. 14]; sect. 30 [para. 22]; sect. 41(1) [para. 28]; sect. 52 [para. 19].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Potter, Harold, An Historical Introduction to English Law and Its Institutions (3rd Ed.), p. 302 [para. 10].

Counsel:

Philip Staufen, on his own behalf;

Manuel Azevedo, amicus curiae;

Jeffrey M. Loenen, for the respondent, Attorney General of British Columbia.

This application was heard in Chambers on May 16, 2001, at Vancouver, British Columbia, before Scarth, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following reasons for judgment on May 29, 2001.

Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.