Ngyou v. JNS Flooring Ltd., 2023 BCPC 224

Citation: Ngyou v. JNS Flooring Ltd. 2023 BCPC 224 Date: 20231026 File No: C19061 Registry: Port Coquitlam IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN: KENNETH J. NGYOU CLAIMANT AND: JNS FLOORING LTD. and STEVEN RONALD JOSEPH ALLAIN DEFENDANTS REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE W. LEE Counsel for the Claimant: L. Vidovich Counsel for the Defendants: J. Kennedy Place of Hearing: Port Coquitlam, B.C. Dates of Hearing: October 16, 17, 2023 Date of Judgment: October 26, 2023

Introduction [ 1 ] Kenneth J. Ngyou has filed a claim against JNS Flooring Ltd. (“JNS Flooring”) and Steven Ronald Joseph Allain concerning a contract for the removal of existing flooring and the installation of new hardwood flooring at Mr. Ngyou’s home in Maple Ridge, B.C. (the “Property”). Mr. Ngyou alleges that the Defendants breached the contract by failing to install the new flooring in a manner consistent with an implied obligation to carry out the work in a good and workmanlike manner. [ 2 ] Mr. Ngyou also says his contract was with both Defendants.

Alternatively, if the contract was only with JNS Flooring, Mr. Ngyou asks this Court to lift the “corporate veil” and find Mr. Allain personally liable along with the company. [ 3 ] The Defendants say the flooring contract was with JNS Flooring and not Mr. Allain personally. They also say the work was carried out properly in a manner as directed by Mr. Ngyou. The Issues [ 4 ] I am asked to determine the following issues:

a) Who were the contracting parties?

b) Was there a breach of contract?

c) If there was a breach of contract, what damages are owed?

d) If Mr. Allain was not a contracting party, should the “corporate veil” be lifted so that Mr. Allain is held personally liable? The Burden of Proof [ 5 ] In a civil case, the Claimant must prove their claim on the balance of probabilities. Stated another way, the evidence must show that the events in support of the claim were more likely than not to have occurred: F.H. v. McDougall , 2008 SCC 53 at para. 49 The Evidence [ 6 ] I heard from the following witnesses:

a) Kenneth J. Ngyou;

b) Sharon Ngyou;

c) Steven Allain;

d) Michael Woodward;

e) Reagan McCallum. [ 7 ] Mr. Ngyou also entered as expert evidence the report of Chris Maskell, an inspector with the BC Floor Covering Association. Caselaw [ 8 ] Both counsels provided me with several court decisions to consider, which I have listed in Appendix A. I have reviewed all cases even if I do not refer to them in my decision. Technical Terms [ 9 ] Based on my review of the evidence, I understood that the flooring work to be done required the removal or demolition of existing flooring, to reveal the underlying substrate.

The new hardwood flooring would be installed over the substrate. [ 10 ] At times during the evidence, the term “subfloor” was used instead of “substrate.” Both terms refer to the same structure, which is the wooden base over which the hardwood flooring is installed. [ 11 ] The final step in the flooring installation would be to affix “transition strips.” This refers to thin strips of wood placed between different flooring areas. For example, a transition strip could be placed between the flooring found in the kitchen and living room. Who Were the Parties to the Contract? [ 12 ] There is no dispute that Mr.

Ngyou entered into a contract with JNS Flooring to remove existing flooring and install new hardwood flooring at the Property. The first issue I must deal with is whether Mr. Allain was also a party to the contract. [ 13 ] Mr. Allain is the sole director of JNS Flooring Ltd. The company was incorporated on May 7, 2019. Mr. Allain testified that his wife is a shareholder. He could not recall whether he owned any shares. JNS Flooring operates out of Mr. Allain’s home.

[ 14 ] Mr. Allain has been installing floors for over 20 years. Mr. Allain’s experience as a flooring installer is such that Michael Woodward, who operates his own construction company, credits Mr. Allain for teaching him about flooring. [ 15 ] Mr. Ngyou contacted Mr. Allain to seek a quote for the flooring work. Mr. Allain came to the Property to take measurements. On April 26, 2021, Mr. Allain sent an email to Mr. Ngyou from the email address jnsflooringltd@gmail.com . It stated: Hi Ken, It was nice meeting you the other day. Here is a estimate for the work we discussed.

Remove tile and dispose. $1150.00 Remove hardwood and dispose. $670.00 Remove carpet and dispose. $425.00 Install 1700 sq ft engineered $2975.00 Install 25 steps + 1 landing $1600.00 Supply square flush nosings $850.00 Install 520 lf 7” flat stock base. $884.00 Supply and install transitions. $150.00 Total $8704.00 + gst *Customer is to provide all materials baseboards and engineered flooring *Customer is to move all furniture as needed (we will install sections for u to move it to.). *Any levelling will be a extra cost Any questions please feel free to call me 778-847-8130 or email me Thanks, Steve [ 16 ] The only reference to JNS Flooring came from the email address.

The email itself failed to display a letterhead, a company name, or provide any indication that Mr. Allain was quoting a contract price on behalf of JNS Flooring. [ 17 ] Mr. Ngyou said the original quote was for the installation of ½ inch flooring. He then decided to change to ¾ inch flooring. This resulted in a price increase. [ 18 ] Mr. Allain sent Mr. Ngyou an email on May 1, 2021, using the email address jnsflooringltd@gmail.com . The email stated: Ok thanks would be looking at additional $1400 to install the ¾. Thanks Steve [ 19 ] The body of the email did not refer to JNS Flooring. [ 20 ] Mr.

Ngyou said there was a further contract change when he asked that Mr. Alain build stairs to the basement. There is no written record of this request. [ 21 ] Mr. Allain confirmed the total contract price on a note written on what appeared to be a receipt book. The note did not display the JNS Flooring name. Mr. Allain showed the note to Mr. Ngyou who took a picture of it. The note read as follows: 8704 original 1400 nail down 10,204 2156 other stair 12263 [ 22 ] Having agreed on the work to be done and the final contract price of $12,263, the contract was now formed. There is no dispute that Mr.

Ngyou paid this sum in cash. [ 23 ] The question then turns to who were the contracting parties.

[ 24 ] Mr. Ngyou’s evidence was that he thought he was dealing directly with Mr. Allain. Ms. Ngyou also testified that she thought they were contracting with Mr. Allain personally. However, she was not a party to the discussions leading to the contract and so I place no weight on her belief. [ 25 ] The purpose of incorporating a company is to create a separate legal entity to carry on business. One significant benefit of incorporation is to protect the owner of the company from personal legal liability.

To take advantage of this benefit, the name of the company must be made known so that anyone doing business with the company is aware they are contracting with the company and not the individual owner. [ 26 ] The need to make known the existence of the company is shown by s. 27 of the Business Corporations Act , which requires a company to display its name at the place of business or on various documents. The

section reads as follows: Name to be displayed 27

(1) A company or extraprovincial company must display its name or, in the case of an extraprovincial company that has adopted an assumed name under this Act, its assumed name, in legible English or French characters, (

a) in a conspicuous position at each place in British Columbia at which it carries on business, (

b) in all its notices and other official publications used in British Columbia, (

c) on all its contracts, business letters and orders for goods, and on all its invoices, statements of account, receipts and letters of credit used in British Columbia, and (

d) on all bills of exchange, promissory notes, endorsements, cheques and orders for money used in British Columbia and signed by it or on its behalf.

(2) If a company has a seal, the company must have its name in legible characters on that seal. [ 27 ] A director or officer who knowingly allows a company to contravene s. 27(1)(a)(

b) or (

c) or (2) may be held personally liable to indemnify any persons who suffer loss or damage as a result of being misled. [ 28 ] Mr. Allain said his business card sets out his company name and his truck displays the company logo and name. However, there was no evidence that Mr. Ngyou was given Mr. Allain’s business card or that he saw Mr. Allain’s truck. [ 29 ] At the time the contract was formed, the only reference to JNS Flooring came from the email address used to send two emails. The body of the emails did not refer to JNS Flooring.

The note setting out the increased price also failed to refer to the company. [ 30 ] I am not satisfied that using a corporate email address alone is sufficient notice that services are to be provided through a company. The extensive requirements of s. 27 of the Business Corporations Act indicate that positive efforts must be made to notify a contracting party of the company before the legal protection of incorporation can be relied upon. [ 31 ] Mr. Allain made no effort to inform Mr. Ngyou that JNS Flooring would provide the flooring work. It was therefore reasonable for Mr. Ngyou to believe he was hiring Mr.

Allain personally to carry out the contract. Mr. Ngyou testified to such and I accept that this was his subjective belief. In the circumstances, I find that Mr. Ngyou contracted with both JNS Flooring and Mr. Allain. Was there a breach of contract? Squeaking and Creaking [ 32 ] Mr. Ngyou testified that when the flooring was installed in the hallways, he noticed creaking sounds when the flooring was walked upon. Mr. Ngyou raised this issue with Mr. Allain who explained that the wood was acclimatizing and would settle down over time. Mr. Ngyou said accepted this explanation as he trusted Mr.

Allain. [ 33 ] As the flooring installation continued, the creaking remained. [ 34 ] When Mr. Allain left the job, the flooring installation had been completed save for the installation of the transition strips. According to Michael Woodward, the installation of transitions was a minor matter that would take only a few minutes. As such, the flooring installation was substantially completed. [ 35 ] Mr. Ngyou sent Mr. Allain several text messages asking to discuss problems with the flooring. The texts themselves made no mention of squeaking problems with the floor. Mr.

Ngyou’s evidence was that he was trying to have Mr. Allain return to the Property to address this issue. This did not occur and Mr. Ngyou then retained a flooring inspector, Chris Maskell of the BC Floor Covering Association, to inspect the floor and provide a report. [ 36 ] Mr. Maskell inspected the floor on August 27, 2021, and prepared a report dated September 1, 2021 (the “Maskell Report”). The report included two short videos of Mr. Maskell walking over two sections of the flooring.

Creaking noises were evident in the videos. [ 37 ] The Maskell Report described squeaks and creaks in the kitchen galley area and the entry hall to the living room. Mr. Maskell tested other areas of the main and upper levels of the house and found they did not exhibit unusual creaking. Other areas of the home had inadequate substrate, or fasteners (nails or staples) were not used according to the manufacturer’s specifications. The stairs were found to be acceptable. [ 38 ] Mr. Maskell concluded his report as follows:

The hardwood flooring in the kitchen area appears (at one heat vent) to have been installed over a substrate that is not recommended by the manufacturer (5/8” OSB). OSB substrates should be ¾ “ thick not 5/8” per manufacturer’s instructions. Also, the new engineered wood flooring has been installed using an inadequate nailing pattern (in those areas tested). These two issues have allowed micro movement withing ( sic ) the flooring system causing the floor to squeak and creak under the weight of normal foot traffic. The installation did not meet industry or manufacturers recommendations due to: 1.

Inadequate number and placement of fasteners (staples). 2. Inadequate thickness of substrate (nailing base) in the kitchen area. 3. Substrate did not meet manufacturers tolerance. [ 39 ] Mr. Maskell confirmed that the thickness of the substrate was below the manufacturer’s recommendations. Furthermore, the nailing pattern used by Mr. Allain was inadequate, resulting in squeaking and creaking when certain areas of the floor were walked upon. [ 40 ] Mr. Ngyou sent the report to Mr. Allain. Further text messages to Mr. Allain followed. On September 13, 2021, Mr. Ngyou texted Mr.

Allain to ask if he would be talking to his insurer. Mr. Allain responded on September 13, 2021, stating: Hi, I haven’t had a chance to look into it. I will on the way home tomorrow. [ 41 ] Mr. Ngyou then sent further text messages to Mr. Allain on September 15, 16 and twice on September 20 with no response. [ 42 ] Mr. Ngyou and Mr. Allain did speak though and on September 22, 2021, Mr. Ngyou texted Mr. Allain to ask what time he would be coming to the Property. Mr. Allain responded, “Not sure yet. Probably early.” However, Mr. Allain never returned to the Property. [ 43 ] Mr.

Allain testified that he never contacted his insurer. [ 44 ] Mr. Ngyou said the floor squeaking continues to this day and may have even worsened. [ 45 ] Sharon Ngyou also said “The floors creak like crazy” and that it has gotten worse over time. The Subfloor [ 46 ] Michael Woodward testified that the subfloor was very squeaky. He recalled that Mr. Ngyou asked him to put screws into the subfloor to prevent the squeaking. Mr. Woodward said he put some 60 screws into the subfloor before Mr. Allain told Mr. Woodward to stop because this was not part of the contracted work. Mr. Woodward did stop.

He testified that it would have taken a total of 30 minutes to place screws into the part of the subfloor that was squeaking. [ 47 ] I found that Mr. Woodward presented his evidence without any embellishment and that he spoke with candour. I accept his evidence. Based on this, I can infer that Mr. Allain was aware that the subfloor was an issue which he chose not to address. [ 48 ] As a professional flooring installer, I find that Mr. Allain should have warned Mr. Ngyou of issues regarding the subfloor. Mr. Ngyou’s evidence was that he was never told of any issues. Installation [ 49 ] Mr.

Ngyou purchased the flooring that Mr. Allain installed. The flooring boards did not come with installation instructions. [ 50 ] Mr. Allain’s evidence was that he asked Mr. Ngyou how to install the flooring. Mr. Allain said Mr. Ngyou did a computer search and told Mr. Allain that the flooring could be nailed and glued to the subfloor. Mr. Allain said he carried out the installation as directed by Mr. Ngyou. [ 51 ] Mr. Allain also confirmed that he did not measure the thickness of the subfloor. [ 52 ] Mr. Ngyou, who testified first, was never asked if he instructed Mr.

Allain to nail and glue the flooring without any other specifications such as the distance between each nail. Out of fairness to Mr. Ngyou, he should have been allowed to confirm or deny this: see Browne v. Dunne, 1893 CanLII 65 (FOREP) , 6 R. 67 , which has been discussed in numerous cases including the recent decision S.T.W. v L.S.D , 2023 BCSC 1677 . [ 53 ] Assuming Mr. Allain did follow Mr. Ngyou’s instructions on installing the flooring, I find that it was unreasonable for Mr. Allain to do so. Mr. Allain has been installing floors for over 20 years. There is no evidence that Mr.

Ngyou has ever been involved in any form of home construction. In these circumstances, an experienced builder like Mr. Allain should not be relying upon Mr. Ngyou’s instructions on installing floors. Mr. Allain also acknowledged in cross-examination that there are several suppliers of wood flooring and that each manufacturer has different installation instructions. Mr. Allain’s background is such that he should have known how to obtain installation instructions if required. [ 54 ] If Mr. Allain sought and followed Mr.

Ngyou’s instructions on how to install the flooring, I find that it would not have been reasonable to do so in the circumstances. [ 55 ] In addition, I refer to two important implied terms in any building contract. [ 56 ] First, it is implied term in any building contract that the builder must complete the work with all proper skill and care: see Vista Leadership Inc. v. Pilon , 2021 BCPC 320 at para. 251 .

[57] Second, where a builder is installing a new product, there is an implied term that installation will be carried out in a mannerconsistent with the manufacturer’s specifications: Mason v. Michaud, 2020 BCPC 283 at para. 10. [58] Mr. Woodward testified that he reviews the installation guide first before installing hardwood. I find that is a proper andreasonable step to take before installing new flooring. [59] After Mr. Allain left the job, Mr. Ngyou obtained a copy of the Mercier Installation Guide. Mercier is the manufacturer of theflooring board.

Among other things, the installation guide said that boards were to be nailed every 4” to 6”. The Maskell Reportconfirmed that this did not occur. [60] The Maskell Report also said the hardwood flooring appeared to have been installed over a substrate or subfloor that was belowthe manufacturer’s recommended minimum thickness. Mr. Allain’s evidence was that he did not check the thickness of the subfloor. [61] Mr. Allain owed a duty of care to carry out the installation in a good and workmanlike manner, and to install the flooringaccording to the manufacturer’s specifications. Based on the evidence of Mr.

Maskell, that did not occur. As such, I am satisfied that theDefendants breached the contract by failing to install the flooring in a good and workmanlike manner following the manufacturer’sinstructions. If there was a breach of contract, what damages are owed? [62] Mr. Ngyou obtained an estimate from Exclusive Floors dated September 21, 2021, for materials and labour for the removal ofthe flooring and the installation of new flooring. The estimate totals $48,505.55 inclusive of taxes. Mr.

Ngyou waived any claim foramounts above the $35,000 statutory maximum of this Court. [63] Small Claims Rule 10(8) confirms that estimates are not expert evidence, and are admissible if served on all other parties at least14 days before trial. No issue was taken about the admissibility of this estimate. [64] The Defendants argue that the flooring work was completed over two years ago and Mr. Ngyou has made no effort to makerepairs. They submit that Mr. Ngyou has no intention to make repairs and therefore an award of damages based on repair costs is notappropriate. The decision Strata Corp. NW 1714 v.

Winkler, (BC CA) was cited in support of this proposition, wherethe Court stated at para. 30: [30] I find no support in the authorities for the proposition that the general rule governing damages for breach of contract requires thecost of reinstatement to be awarded even where it would not be reasonable to reinstate, and where there is no intention to do so. Were theplaintiffs to recover on the basis asserted by them in this case, they would be in a far better position than if the contract had been properlyperformed.

They would then have a sum of money approximately equal to the original cost of that area of the building occupied by themand would still have a building serviceable for their purposes. That would not be a reasonable result. It therefore cannot be one intendedby the general rule, the purpose of which is to grant full compensation, not a windfall. [65] The difficulty with this submission is that both Mr. Ngyou and Ms. Ngyou confirmed that they had saved their funds to affordthe costs of new flooring, which funds were paid to the Defendants. Mr.

Ngyou’s evidence was that they lacked additional funds to carryout another removal and replacement of the flooring. This is not a case where Mr. Ngyou had no intention of making repairs. I amsatisfied that the purpose of the litigation was to obtain an award to allow for the repairs to be performed. [66] The Defendants also argue that Mr. Ngyou failed to mitigate his damages by not accepting an offer by Mr. Allain to make repairsat no cost. Mr. Allain made this offer sometime after Mr. Maskell issued his report. Mr. Allain proposed to replace the flooring at nocost to Mr. Ngyou so long as Mr.

Ngyou purchased the materials. Mr. Ngyiou turned the offer down on the basis that he should not haveto purchase materials to replace that which the Defendants improperly installed. Furthermore, he spent the funds saved up for theconstruction job. [67] In the decision Canadian Quality Stucco Ltd. v. Pangli, 2022 BCPC 126, I discussed whether a contractor had a right to makerepairs. At para. 124, I stated: [124] From these cases, I draw the following principles that apply to any claim or counterclaim against a contractor or builder: 1.

There is a presumption in every construction contract that the contractor or builder is entitled to have a reasonable opportunity tocorrect any deficiencies. 2. This presumption may be rebutted based on the circumstances, including the following:

a) The contract expressly or by necessary implication does not give the contractor or builder the right to correct deficiencies;

b) The contract has been validly terminated such that the parties are released from their obligations under the contract;

c) The contractor or builder, has through its words, actions or inaction, elected not to correct the deficiencies;

d) The contractor or builder has fundamentally breached the contract; or

e) The circumstances are such that it would be unreasonable to permit the contractor or builder an opportunity to correct thedeficiencies. One such circumstance is if the contractor or builder is unable or unwilling to correct the deficiencies within a reasonabletime. 3. If a party with a claim against the contractor or builder improperly prevents the contractor or builder from correcting anydeficiencies, then this may be a breach of that party’s duty to mitigate and adversely affect any claim by that party against the contractoror builder.

[68] The evidence from Mr. Ngyou was clear that he had lost faith in the Defendants to make proper repairs. In circumstances whereMr. Allain was not responding to Mr. Ngyou’s messages, I find that the loss of faith was reasonable. [69] Furthermore, Mr. Allain’s proposal for making the repairs required Mr. Ngyou to expend further money that Mr. Ngyou did nothave. I conclude that it was not reasonable for Mr. Ngyou to accept Mr. Allain’s offer. It follows that the Defendants have not proventhat Mr.

Ngyou has failed to mitigate his losses. [70] The Exclusive Floors estimate was broken down as follows: Main Floor materials $18,470.30 Main Floor labour $7,077.22 Upstairs labour and materials $20,648.25 [71] With taxes, this totalled $48,605.55 [72] Not all the costs set out in this estimate are appropriate. For instance, the estimate referred to “Rip Out & Remove-Stairs.” Mr.Maskell found no issue with the stairs. The quote also had costs for the upstairs.

The Maskell Report did not identify any noise issueswith the upstairs. [73] The Maskell Report did identify the following areas of the Property as not meeting industry and manufacturer’s tolerances forflatness:

a) Entry Hall;

b) Entry to Washroom;

c) Kitchen Galley;

d) Dining Room;

e) Upper Landing;

f) Master Bedroom. [74] Although the Defendants installed flooring on a substrate that did not meet the manufacturer’s recommended thickness, theMaskell Report did not say this caused any problems with the flooring. For this part of the claim, the award would be at best for nominaldamages. [75] The Exclusive Floors estimate is excessive because it included costs for areas that the Maskell Report did not identify asimproperly built. I will still consider that estimate to calculate the amount of damages suffered. I draw support for doing this by referringto the decision Quick Pass Master Tutorial School Ltd. v.

Zhao, 2022 BCSC 1846, which stated: [96] The fact that damages are difficult to assess does not mean that the court should relieve the wrongdoer of the necessity to paythem: Penvidic Contracting Co. Ltd. v. International Nickel Co. of Canada, (SCC), [1976] 1 S.C.R. 267 at 289. In somecases, the best that can be achieved is a rough estimate as to the amount of damages that have been suffered: Nickel v. Takhar, 2020BCSC 1462at para. 62.

The court can and should draw inferences from the evidence as to the probable extent of the loss and determinethe quantum of the loss as best it can. [76] After considering the evidence, I will set the amount of damages payable by the Defendants at $20,000. [77] In addition, the Defendants will reimburse Mr. Ngyou for the filing fee of $156 and the service fee of $110 for a total of $266. [78] Under Small Claims Rule 20, if there is a claim by Mr. Ngyou for any other fees and expenses, which may include the cost ofMr. Maskell’s report, Mr.

Ngyou may submit a claim with any supporting invoices to the Court for my consideration. Mr. Ngyou mustalso provide a copy of those documents to counsel for the Defendants so that they may respond to the expense claim. If such a claim ismade, I will issue further written reasons setting out my decision. [79] Both Defendants are jointly and severally liable as both Defendants contracted with Mr. Ngyou. If Mr. Allain was not a contracting party, should the “corporate veil” be lifted so that Mr. Allain is held personally liable? [80] As I found that Mr.

Allain was a contracting party, there is no need for me to discuss lifting of the “corporate veil.” Nevertheless,I will still set out my thoughts on this issue. [81] The reference to lifting the “corporate veil” means looking behind a company to fix liability on an owner. The situations wherethis has occurred include the following:

a) The company was used for fraudulent or illegitimate purposes: Big Bend Hotel Ltd. v. Security Mutual Casualty Co., (BC SC);

b) There has been fraud or improper conduct where "a corporation is used to effect a purpose or commit

an act which the shareholder

could not effect or commit": B.G. Preeco (Pacific Coast) Ltd. v. Bon Street Holdings Ltd., (BC CA) at para. 41. [82] The corporate veil will not be lifted simply for reasons of unfairness: Edgington v. Mulek Estate, 2008 BCCA 505 at para. 24. [83] Counsel for Mr. Ngyou invited me to consider lifting the corporate veil because Mr. Allain controlled JNS Flooring, he was itsonly employee, the flooring contract was breached and the company would allow Mr. Allain to avoid personal liability. These reasonsfall well short of the fraudulent or improper conduct necessary to look behind the corporate entity.

Furthermore, JNS Flooring was notformed for an illegal purpose, having been incorporated in May 2019, almost two years before Mr. Ngyou entered into the contract. [84] Had I found that Mr. Ngyou only contracted with JNS Flooring, there would have been no basis to lift the corporate veil to fixliability on Mr. Allain.

Summary [85] My order is as follows: JNS Flooring Ltd. and Steven Ronald Joseph Allain are jointly and severally liable to pay Kenneth J. Ngyou $20,000 and court costs of$266.00. Should Kenneth J. Ngyou wish to submit a claim for payment of further reasonable charges, expenses or a penalty relating to the conductof these proceedings pursuant to Small Claims Rule 20, or for payment of a penalty pursuant to Small Claims Rule 10.1, he will within 21days of the date of this decision:

a) Submit the claim along with any supporting documentation to this Court for approval, and

b) Provide a copy of those submissions to the Defendants. If the Defendants wish to set out their position about the claim for reasonable charges, expenses, or any penalty, then they must filewritten submissions with the Court no later than 35 days of the date of this decision, with a copy provided to Kenneth J. Ngyou. _____________________________ The Honourable Judge W. Lee Provincial Court of British Columbia Appendix A Caselaw 1. B.G. Preeco (Pacific Coast) Ltd. v. Bon Street Holdings Ltd., (BC CA) 2. Blackburn (Re), 2011 BCSC 1572 3. Cockburn v. Trusts and Guarantee Co., (SCC), 55 SCR 264 4. Edgington v.

Mulek Estate, 2008 BCCA 505 5. Garth’s Carpet & Color Centre Ltd. v. Platzke, 2010 SKPC 34 6. Interprovincial Concrete Ltd v Great West Construction Ltd, [1987] SJ No 23 7. Kosmopoulos v. Constitution Insurance Co., (SCC), [1987] 1 SCR 2 8. Mack v. Stuike, (SK KB) 9. Mason v. Michaud, 2020 BCPC 283 10. SPC Holdings v. Gabriel, 2013 BCPC 31 11. Tresoro Mining Corporation v. Mercer Gold Corp. (B.C.), 2015 BCSC 1822 12. XY, LLC v. Zhu, 2013 BCCA 352 13. Strata Corp. NW1714 v. Winkler, [1987] B.C.J. No. 2340, 14. Morse Electro Products (Canada) Corpn. v. Central Discount House Ltd., [1978] B.C.J. No. 1058