Citation: Snarpen Contracting Ltd. v.

Arbutus Bay Estates Ltd.

Date: 19991019

Docket: CA015467
1999 BCCA 609

CA015474

CA015475

Registry: Vancouver

COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
BETWEEN: CA015467

SNARPEN CONTRACTING LTD.

PLAINTIFF

(RESPONDENT)
AND:

ARBUTUS BAY ESTATES LTD.

DEFENDANT

(APPELLANT)
AND:

PAULA BUCHHOLZ

DEFENDANT
BETWEEN: CA015474

ALBERT EBERHARD

PLAINTIFF

(RESPONDENT)
AND:

ARBUTUS BAY ESTATES LTD.

DEFENDANT

(APPELLANT)
BETWEEN: CA015475

STANLEY GRIMSHIRE

PLAINTIFF

(RESPONDENT)
AND:

ARBUTUS BAY ESTATES LTD.

DEFENDANT

(APPELLANT)

 

 
Before: The Honourable Madam Justice Southin
The Honourable Mr. Justice Cumming
The Honourable Madam Justice Prowse

 

 
Patrick G. Guy

Counsel for the Appellant
Robert E. Ross

Counsel for the Respondent
Place and Date of Hearing

Vancouver, British Columbia

29th March, 1996
Place and Date of Judgment

Vancouver, British Columbia

18th April, 1996
Date of Supplementary Reasons:

29th November, 1996
Date of Supplementary Reasons:

18th May, 1999
Written Submissions received:

7th October, 1999
Date of Further Supplementary Reasons:

19th October, 1999

 

 Supplementary Reasons by:

The Honourable Madam Justice Southin

 

Concurred in by:

The Honourable Mr. Justice Cumming
The Honourable Madam Justice Prowse

  

Supplementary Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Madam Justice Southin:

[1] The Court has the submissions of counsel which indicate that the parties are unable to agree on two matters arising from the Court's supplementary reasons dated the 18th May, 1999.

[2] What we intended by those reasons was to exclude the two claims for labour allegedly expended by Mrs. Buchholz, as set out in paragraph 15 of those reasons. Those amounts are $33,750.00 and $12,000.00.

[3] The claims remaining are, therefore, $107,446.21 - [$33,750.00 + $12,000.00] = $61,696.21.

[4] If the Registrar is satisfied that Arbutus Bay Estates Ltd., the successful appellant, did in fact expend the other sums claimed for purposes which fall within the original directions of this Court, she is to allow them. When she settles on those claims, there is then to be a set-off of $10,293.06 (see paragraph 21 of the supplementary reasons).

[5] As to the question of costs, I had, in the supplementary reasons of 18th May, 1999, quite forgotten about the supplementary reasons of 29th November, 1996. I assume that, as yet, no order has been drawn up to reflect those supplementary reasons. It should be drawn up. The appellant was intended by the Court to have the costs of the trial as there ordered.

 

 

 

 

 

"THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE SOUTHIN"  

 

 

I AGREE: "THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CUMMING"

 

 

I AGREE: "THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE PROWSE"