Shill v. Hooker
Ernest Hooker
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

D. McKay

Karen Knutson
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

D. McKay

Fred Shill
Law Firm / Organization
Jones Emery LLP
Lawyer(s)

Jessica Travers

Kelly Shill
Law Firm / Organization
Jones Emery LLP
Lawyer(s)

Jessica Travers

  • Facts: Fred Shill and Kelly Shill petitioned for access to their neighbors' property, owned by Ernest Hooker and Karen Knutson, to repair and maintain a fence.
  • Issue: The dispute revolved around the right to access the neighbor's property for fence maintenance under s. 34 of the Property Law Act.
  • Court's Ruling: The Supreme Court of British Columbia granted the Shills access to the Hooker and Knutson property for maintenance purposes under specific terms. However, the court declined their request for declaratory relief on sole ownership of the fence due to minor encroachments.
  • Costs/Damages Awarded: The judgment does not specify the amount of costs or damages awarded.
Supreme Court of British Columbia
231340
Civil litigation
Petitioner