Background: 1057600 B.C. Ltd. (105) appealed an order canceling an easement registered against property owned by 1249645 B.C. Ltd. (124). The easement, initially granted in 2015, allowed 105 access to 124's property. The properties were owned by related companies until 2020, when 124 barred 105's access.

Legal Arguments/Issues:

• Validity of the Easement: 105 argued the easement was valid and enforceable, while 124 contended it was not.
• Landlocked Property: 105 claimed that without the easement, their property would be landlocked.
• Easement Modification: In 2020, 105 unilaterally modified the easement, which 124 argued was invalid.

Judgment: The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower court's decision. It found no reviewable error in the conclusion that the easement and its modification were invalid and unenforceable. The court also ruled that 105 had not proven their property would be landlocked without the easement. The claim for an implied easement based on necessity was not substantiated.

Costs/Awards: The document did not specify the total amount of costs or awards in favor of the successful party.