Response to Westsea's Application for Leave to Cross-Appeal, and my "long-paper"

This is a short update:

I've filed a Response to Westsea's Application for Leave to Cross-Appeal.

Basically, I wanted to focus the court's attention on the test for prudent and reasonable discretion under the lease.  It is both parties' aim (Westsea's and mine) for the court to reconsider whether litigation costs are payable by the leaseholders as an operating expense under the lease. This by itself is not likely to be an issue the court would find to be of public and national importance, but it's possible that a number of other issues are. Regardless, the parties respective applications for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada are long-shots.

I have also prepared what I call my "long paper on private 99-year leases".  Basically the idea is to lay the groundwork for why new legislation regulating these 99-year leases is necessary in BC. I've sent this to the BC Law Institute https://www.bcli.org/ and have received a positive response.  They have indicated they will table the matter at an upcoming meeting to discuss whether the issues warrant a report by the BCLI.  I feel cautiously optimistic my paper makes a sufficient case for a further review by the BCLI, but we won't know for a while.  If the BCLI decides to report on the issues, it would go a long way to persuading our legislators that some kind of legislation is needed.

I have also sent the paper to Jacquie Dawes, Deputy Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. It is my understanding that staff have been assigned to review these 99-year leases, which I expect is largely a response to the numerous emails and correspondences from leaseholders who have raised concerns about these leases, both at Orchard House and other 99-leaseholds in BC. However, this paper should assist policy staff to understand the problems with these leases and where there is a legislative gap.

Note I may make ongoing updates to the long-paper.