SWS Marketing Inc. v. Zavier
SWS Marketing Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Murphy Battista LLP
Lawyer(s)

Derek M. Palaschuk

Odin Zavier
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

A. Grewal

Thane Lanz
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Randall Rogiani
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

A. Grewal

Eduardo Soto
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

A. Grewal

Gary Mythen
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

A. Grewal

Sacha Elez
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Burt Petersen
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

A. Grewal

Charlene Petersen
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

A. Grewal

Fan Jin
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

A. Grewal

Gordon Lemon
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

A. Grewal

Doris Lanz
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Joseph Lanz
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

A. Grewal

The Owners Strata Plan Kas 1886
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

R. Gauthier

The Tenants: John Doe #1, Jane Doe #1, John Doe #2, Jane Doe #2, John Doe #3, Jane Doe #3, John Doe #4, Jane Doe #4, John Doe #5, Jane Doe #5, John Doe #6, Jane Doe #6, John Doe #7, Jane Doe #7, John Doe #8, Jane Doe #8, John Doe #9, Jane Doe #9
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented

Introduction:
The case arose from prolonged disputes over a real estate investment project in Vernon, BC. SWS Marketing Inc. sued Odin Zavier, Thane Lanz, and others over breaches of joint venture agreements related to managing and selling 14 strata-titled units.

Background:
The dispute stemmed from a 2010 joint venture where SWS managed the properties, sharing profits and losses with unit purchasers. Relations soured in 2012, leading to competing strata councils and multiple lawsuits. In 2022, Justice Adair ruled that Zavier and others breached agreements but awarded no damages, requiring further hearings on remedies.

Key Legal Issues:

  1. Sale of Strata Units: Defendants sought to sell units individually rather than as a group, claiming the current approach hindered resolution. The court held jurisdiction to amend the 2022 order, allowing individual sales but suspended this for 12 months due to rezoning advantages.
  2. Compliance with the Residential Tenancy Act (RTA): Defendants alleged SWS violated tenant rights under the RTA. The court varied the prior order, requiring SWS to adhere to statutory notice requirements for tenant access.

Rulings and Costs:
Justice Burke ordered procedural adjustments but did not award damages or costs to either party, emphasizing judicial economy and the need to resolve the prolonged litigation.

Supreme Court of British Columbia
S138229
Real estate