Sara Dubinsky Successfully Defends Remedial Action Resolution on Judicial Review

In Ferstel v. Nanaimo (Regional District), 2026 BCSC 291, the BC Supreme Court dismissed a petition challenging a remedial action resolution (“RAR”) requiring the demolition of buildings declared hazardous and unsafe by the Regional District’s Board. Although the Petitioner had undertaken efforts to address the buildings’ condition, the Court held that the Board’s decision on reconsideration to uphold the RAR was reasonable. The Court further confirmed that a lack of unanimity among Board members does not render a decision unreasonable in law.

Bill M216–2025, the Professional Reliance Act, has recently been introduced in the provincial legislature (First Reading October 21 and Second Reading November 17). If enacted, the law would impact local government powers, responsibilities, and liability, as summarized below.

Matthew Voell Successfully Defends Aggressive Dog Determination on Appeal

Dog bylaws often impose requirements for dogs determined to be “aggressive” or “dangerous”, but such determinations can be challenged in court. In Madi v. North Vancouver (District), 2025 BCCA 369, the dog owner argued that the determination of District staff was unreasonable and procedurally unfair, but the Court upheld the determination. This case will be a useful guide for local governments when carrying out (and defending) their dog designation processes.