91 Expiration And Renewal

PRACTICE

Application for Renewal of Judgment

Submissions

On the Form 17 Charge, Notation or Filing, select Nature of Interest, Judgment, and apply for a renewal in the additional information field and attach an image of a copy of the original registered judgment.

Cancellation of Judgment Expired by Effluxion of Time

Submissions

On the Form 17 Cancellation of Charge, Notation or Filing, select Nature of Interest, Charge by Effluxion of Time. Complete the Charge No. field and state Judgment by effluxion of time in the additional information field.

CROSS REFERENCES AND OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION

“Nonexpiring Judgment”

See the definition of “nonexpiring judgment” in s. 81 of the Act.

Release of Judgment

See s. 214 of the Land Title Act in this Manual.

Judgments Dropped in Foreclosure Actions

See the “Practice” material under s. 30 of the Land Title Act in this Manual.

Trustee in Bankruptcy Registered Free of Judgments Against Bankrupt

Judgment creditors are not secured creditors under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and are not entitled to priority over receiving orders or assignments. Consequently, the registrar registers trustees in bankruptcy free of judgments against the bankrupt but may send notice to the judgment holders. See ss. 70 and 74 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.

Notices of Maintenance Orders Registered under Family Maintenance Enforcement Act

Notices of Maintenance Orders are Nonexpiring

See s. 26(5) of the Family Maintenance Enforcement Act at chapter 41 (Family Matters) in this Manual.

Discharge of Notices of Maintenance Order

See chapter 41 (Family Matters) in this Manual, and particularly s. 26(7) to (13) of the Family Maintenance Enforcement Act.

Secondary Sources

See Di Castri, Registration of Title to Land, vol. 3, para. 936.

CASE LAW

Limitation Period

On February 21, 1973, the petitioner obtained judgment against the respondent. On March 23, 1981 and May 13, 1983, the petitioner registered the judgment against two parcels of land in which the respondent supposedly had an interest. On April 19, 1983, the petitioner applied under s. 92 for an order for sale. The proceedings under s. 92 were statute barred because they constituted an “action on a judgment” under s. 3(3)(f) of the Limitation Act, which had to be brought within 10 years of the date the judgment was granted. The procedure under s. 91 provides a mechanism for establishing priority for that judgment over any subsequent dealing with the affected land but does not permit a judgment to remain in force indefinitely for the purposes of proceedings under s. 92 (Sign-O-Lite Plastics Ltd. v. Kennedy, 1983 CanLII 567 (BC SC)).

Note that s. 3(3)(f) of the Limitation Act, S.B.C. 1996, c. 266, has been repealed and replaced by s. 7(a) of the Limitation Act, S.B.C. 2012, c. 13.

Renewal After Part Payment

See the annotation for McKay v. McKay, [1992] B.C.J. No. 2219 (QL) (S.C. Master), under s. 241 of the Land Title Act.

Renewal of Judgment

For a discussion of the relationship between judgments and certificates of pending litigation, see the annotation for McFarlane Travel Service Ltd. v. Godlonton, 2006 BCSC 286, under s. 215 of the Land Title Act.

Re-registration of Lapsed Judgment Permitted within 10-year Limitation Period

In Barker v. Daum, 2018 BCCA 402, the appellate court said the trial judge did not err in his interpretation of ss. 83 and 91 of the Act by concluding a judgment that has lapsed can be re-registered. As the 10-year limitation period for the judgment had not expired, the creditors were permitted under the Act to re-register the judgment after the two-year limitation period lapsed.