Is a front desk critical to the operation of a resort a violation of a covenant of trust?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from 585582 B.C. Ltd. v. Anderson, 2015 BCCA 261 (CanLII):
Finally, the judge adopted the reasoning in PMT XII LLC v. Strata Plan VR 2753, 2010 BCSC 1235, and held that, as the front desk is critical to the operation of the Resort, the covenant met the requirement that it touch and concern the land in the sense that it was for the benefit of or the enhancement of the value of the benefitted land.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Does the operation of the title to defeat the claim of a resulting trust or constructive trust as against a third party? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can beneficiaries of a trust terminate the trust and have the trust property transferred to them? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for the presumption of resulting trust in a purchase money resulting trust? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is a constructive trust and what is the test for such a trust? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is a discretionary trust and what are the characteristics of a discretionary Trust? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have the courts interpreted the doctrine of fiduciary trust in the context of an alleged breach of trust? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a stranger to a trust be found liable for knowingly participating in a fraudulent breach of trust? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a shareholder of a Real Estate Investment Trust entitled to a claim of diminution in the value of the trust's assets? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a strata operator permitted to operate a single occupancy unit (STA) without obtaining approval from the section executive? (British Columbia, Canada)
When the BCLRC recommended that the distinction between express and constructive trusts be abolished for limitation purposes, does the distinction take into account the remedial constructive trust? (British Columbia, Canada)
