Real Estate Development

We act for developers and affected owners in disputes over rezoning applications and Official Community Plan amendments, including challenges to how a local government exercised its powers under the Local Government Act or the Vancouver Charter. Our lawyers assess whether a council followed the process the legislation requires, since a bylaw adopted through a defective process is vulnerable to being set aside on judicial review. A rezoning decision is not final simply because it has been made, and we advise clients on both sides of that reality.

We bring and defend judicial review petitions under the Judicial Review Procedure Act challenging a municipal decision that approved, refused, or conditioned a development. Our lawyers focus on the public hearing process and the fairness of the decision, because BC courts have quashed rezoning bylaws and development permits where the required hearing process was flawed. This remedy allows a developer, or a community group opposing a development, to have a defective decision sent back for a proper rehearing.

We represent owners and developers in appeals to a Board of Variance and in related challenges to a bylaw enforcement or permit decision, where a strict application of a zoning bylaw causes undue hardship. Our lawyers prepare the evidentiary record the Board requires and frame the hardship in the specific terms the legislation recognizes. These appeals are governed by tighter grounds than an owner often expects, and we advise candidly on whether a given situation actually qualifies.

We challenge development permit refusals and the imposition of conditions a developer considers unlawful or beyond a local government's authority to require. Our lawyers assess whether a condition is genuinely tied to the development's impact or amounts to an ultra vires demand the municipality cannot lawfully impose. Distinguishing a lawful condition from an overreaching one is often what determines whether a project proceeds on workable terms.

We act for developers disputing development cost charges, community amenity contributions, and other levies imposed as a condition of approval, where the amount or the basis for the charge is open to challenge. Our lawyers review the enabling bylaw and the statutory authority behind the charge, since these levies must rest on a proper legal foundation to be enforceable. A charge imposed without that foundation, or miscalculated against the bylaw, is one a developer can properly contest.

We resolve disputes between joint venture and co-development partners over project control, profit allocation, capital contributions, and a partner's failure to perform its obligations. Our lawyers work through the joint venture or partnership agreement to establish each party's actual entitlements before a dispute stalls the project entirely. A development partnership in conflict tends to damage the project's financing and timeline faster than the disagreement itself, which is why we press for an early, decisive resolution.

We act in disputes arising from a land assembly, where multiple owners have agreed to sell adjoining parcels for a development and one party seeks to withdraw, renegotiate, or hold out. Our lawyers assess the enforceability of the assembly agreements and the remedies available when a single owner's conduct threatens the entire project. Because a land assembly depends on every parcel coming together, one owner's breach can carry consequences far beyond that owner's own lot.

We represent developers in disputes with construction lenders and other financiers over funding advances, default declarations, and enforcement against a project mid-construction. Our lawyers assess whether a lender's declared default and its remedies are consistent with the loan and security documents, since a wrongful default declaration can be as damaging to a project as a genuine one. Protecting a project's financing during a dispute is often what keeps the development alive long enough to resolve the underlying issue.

We resolve disputes over easements, statutory rights of way, and restrictive covenants that constrain how a development site can be used or built on. Our lawyers review the registered instruments against the Land Title Act and the project's actual requirements to determine whether a charge can be modified, cancelled, or must be worked around. A single overlooked charge on title can materially reduce a site's developable value, and we address these disputes before they stall a project.

We file and challenge certificates of pending litigation affecting development property, a registration that can freeze a project by clouding title while a dispute is unresolved. Our lawyers confirm that any CPL genuinely asserts an interest in land rather than being used as leverage over a simple contractual claim, since BC courts have consistently cancelled CPLs that do not meet that standard. Removing an improper CPL quickly is often essential to keeping a development financeable and on schedule.

We advise developers whose project has been sterilized by a down-zoning or regulatory change that removes the site's reasonable development potential, a situation that can amount to a constructive expropriation. Our lawyers apply the test the Supreme Court of Canada set out in St. John's (City) v. Lynch, 2024 SCC 17, and coordinate with ATAC LAW's expropriation practice where a formal compensation claim is warranted. A regulatory change that destroys a site's development value may be a compensable taking, not simply a cost of doing business.