122 Cancellation Of Plans By Application To The Registrar

CROSS REFERENCES AND OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION

See s. 132 of the Act regarding opposition to the cancellation or alteration under this Part of the boundaries of all or part of a public area by a municipal council, regional board, or local trust committee.

See s. 133 of the Act regarding opposition to the cancellation or alteration under this Part of the boundaries of all or part of a public area that is an arterial highway by the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure.

CASE LAW

The appellants were successors in title to four lots created by the subdivision of land within an earlier plan. A road allowance was also dedicated as part of the earlier plan, although it was never used for its intended purpose. Part 8 of the Act permits a petition for the cancellation of a plan by an owner who has dedicated adjacent land “in the plan” for a public area where that land has not been used for the purpose for which it was dedicated. The court found that the owners under the earlier plan had a residual interest in the dedicated road allowance. Under the Torrens system, an interest in land, including a residual interest, may be removed from the land either by agreement in writing for consideration or by the exercise of the power to expropriate. For a subsequent registration of a subdivision plan to extinguish an interest in an earlier subdivision, there must be some express or explicit authorization of that result. In this case, the subsequent subdivision did not alter the nature of the road allowance or the residual interest in it held by the successors in title. They were thus entitled to apply to the registrar for the cancellation of the unused road allowance (Ratzlaff v. British Columbia (Registrar of Land Titles), 1999 CanLII 6647 (BC SC)).