KSW Lawyers Partner Featured in Canada’s Top 50 Lawyers.
CONTACT
PAY BILL
LINKEDIN
CONTACT
PAY BILL
LINKEDIN
CONTACT
PAY BILL
LINKEDIN
Home
> Lawyer Content
> Blog title on how to fine the perfect lawyer

Successful Cases

Explore our triumphs: Dive into our success cases, showcasing our ability to secure favourable verdicts and settlements for our clients. From personal injury to business disputes, our skilled legal team has a proven track record of delivering positive results. Gain insight into our expertise and how we can help you with your legal needs

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Review Reference #R0239077
Our client was a Search and Rescue Volunteer that developed PTSD due to his exposure to many traumatic events, which prevented him from working at his regular job. WorkSafeBC tried to set his wage rate at the statutory minimum of $10 per week because his injuries related to his volunteer work. We sought a review of this decision and the Review Division overturned the Board. As a result, our client now receives fair compensation.
Read More
Roy v. Tailwind Management Systems and others, 2013 BCHRT 258
The employer brought an application to dismiss our client’s human rights claim after she was terminated from employment during a medical leave. The Tribunal dismissed the application and found the case should proceed. The case was subsequently resolved before the hearing.
Read More
Royal Bank of Canada v. Seikhon Farms et al., 2014 BCSC No. B081815, Vancouver Registry
Chris was co-counsel in defending a large Abbotsford farming operation in an action brought by the Royal Bank for $800,000. We third-partied several other businesses involved in the transaction in question. One of the third parties was in bankruptcy and applied for an absolute discharge, which would have prevented our client from continuing the third party claim. We argued against the application and it was dismissed. The case was settled soon after this.
Read More
Royal Canadian Legion Branch Maple Ridge Branch #88 v Service, Health, Manufacturing and Allied Workers Union, CLAC Local 501, 2016 CanLII 44229 (BC LRB)
Chris represented the Employer in defending a reconsideration application before the Labour Relations Board involving the description of a bargaining unit in the context of a union raid application. The union’s resonsideration application was denied.
Read More
Sidhu v. Sever, 2014 BCPC No. 20971, Abbotsford Registry
Chris represented the claimant in a breach of contract action regarding a construction dispute. After a four day trial, our client was awarded judgment. The judgment was unique in that the court accepted our client’s argument for compensation based on contractual restitution under the principles of quantum meruit.
Read More
WCAT No. A1602170
We acted for a landscape construction company that was fined just under $32,000 when two of its workers failed to wear a seatbelt while driving a tractor on a large construction project in Abbotsford. After an appeal to WCAT, the penalty was downgraded to a lesser category and cut in half.
Read More
Desrochers v. Teksmed Services, 2013 BCHRT 56
Our client was terminated from employment during a medical leave. The employer applied to dismiss her complaint to the Tribunal, partly because of a concurrent employment standards proceeding. The Tribunal dismissed the employer’s application and found the case had a reasonable prospect of success. It was settled shortly after the decision.
Read More
G.R. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission, 2016 SSTGDEI
Client applied for EI benefits and was denied. The main issue was whether the Appellant lost his employment by reason of his own conduct, specifically being terminated for absenteeism. Chris was able to successfully show that his client’s actions did not constitute misconduct.
Read More
Gibson v Matthies, 2017 BCSC 839
Chris represented the defendant in a claim brought by the plaintiff in relation to a motorcycle accident. After a three-day trial on liability, the Court determined that the plaintiff was 75% responsible for the accident.
Read More