What is the burden on Prior to show that the easement provides no practical benefit?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Prior Holdings Ltd. v The Source Enterprises Ltd., 2019 BCSC 1871 (CanLII):

The burden is on Prior to show that the easement provides no practical benefit: Tri-X Timber Corporation v. Rutherford, 2012 BCCA 71 at para. 29.

Other Questions


What is the burden upon the petitioner to prove that continuation of the covenant is not practical benefit? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does notice of a decision to terminate life insurance benefits effective November 3, 1998 need to be provided prior to October 8, 1998? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a past practice of granting consent benefits result in an accrued right to the benefits? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a joint tenant who takes the entire benefit of real property through survivorship must take the burden associated with the benefit? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is an easement valid to provide access to water in the well? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for establishing that a prior relationship between a client and a law firm prior to the disclosure of confidential information? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can an employer be bound by their past practice of granting consent benefits? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a service provider required to disclose the name and location of a residential home and the name of the service provider? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a tortfeasor benefit from the sacrifices made by a plaintiff in obtaining insurance to provide for lost wages? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a long-established and invariable practice of chiropractor practice be changed if the environment in which it exists changes? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.