Citation: Bazan v Bazan et al, 2022 MBCA 91 Date: 20221108 Docket: AI22-30-09734 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Madam Justice Holly C. Beard Madam Justice Jennifer A. Pfuetzner Madam Justice Janice L. leMaistre BETWEEN : ) W. P. Bazan MONICA BAZAN ) on his own behalf ) (Applicant) Respondent ) K. A. Vilks ) for the Respondent - and - ) M. Bazan ) patricia ann bazan, by the committee of ) J.

Taylor her Property and Personal Care, the PUBLIC ) for the Respondent GUARDIAN AND TRUSTEE OF MANITOBA ) the Public Guardian and ) Trustee of Manitoba (Respondent) Respondent ) ) Appeal heard and - and - ) Decision pronounced: ) November 1, 2022 WILLIAM PATRICK BAZAN ) ) Written reasons: (Respondent) Appellant ) November 8, 2022 pfuetzner JA (for the Court) : [ 1 ] The respondent, William Patrick Bazan (the respondent), appeals an order of the application judge pronounced January 21, 2022. At the hearing, we dismissed the appeal with brief reasons to follow.

These are those reasons. [ 2 ] The respondent’s grounds of appeal are that the application judge erred in law, misapplied the law to the facts, and made findings not supported by, and inconsistent with, the evidence. [ 3 ] Among other things, he argues that procedural fairness required the application judge to give him time prior to hearing the application to file further evidence based on the outcome of several preliminary motions; that the application judge erred in finding that the applicant does not hold her half interest in certain real property in trust for Patricia Ann Bazan; that the application judge did not have jurisdiction to discharge the caveat the respondent had filed on title to the real property because the statutory procedure in The Real Property Act , CCSM c R30 , was not followed; that the application judge erred in awarding costs to the Public Guardian and Trustee of Manitoba (the PGT); and that the application judge erred in finding that the applicant did not agree with the respondent living at the property until 2025. [ 4 ] We have carefully considered the oral and written submissions and we are not persuaded that the application judge erred.

In our view, there is no merit to this appeal. [ 5 ] The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs fixed in the sum of $1,000 all-inclusive, payable by the respondent to the applicant, and costs fixed in the sum of $500 all-inclusive, payable by the respondent to the PGT, both within 60 days. JA

JA JA