Background
The underlying dispute concerned unpaid strata fees secured by a lien against Shimin Zhang’s strata unit. After the Supreme Court of British Columbia declared Zhang in default and directed an assessment of the amount owing, with a sale of the property to follow if payment was not made, Zhang appealed. His principal argument was that the chambers judge should have adjourned the petition hearing because Zhang was allegedly ill and hospitalized in China.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal in Zhang v. The Owners, Strata Plan BCS 4288, 2026 BCCA 55. It ordered Zhang to pay special costs after finding that his daughter and agent, Li Zhang, had engaged in deliberate abuse of process involving an affidavit falsely presented as sworn before a British Columbia commissioner, and that Zhang’s conduct showed persistent delay and disregard of procedural rules and court directions. The July 23 decision concerned the Registrar’s assessment of the amount payable under that special-costs order.
At the assessment stage, Zhang did not appear personally, and retained counsel withdrew shortly before the rescheduled hearing. The Registrar denied another last-minute adjournment and refused Li Zhang a further right of audience, citing continuing uncertainty about her authority, repeated opportunities for Zhang or counsel to appear, and her ineffective and misleading conduct—including admitting that she had signed her father’s signature on a letter seeking an adjournment.
The Court’s Holding
The Registrar proceeded with the assessment in Zhang’s absence and assessed the strata corporation’s special costs and disbursements at $39,703.92. Applying Rules 71 and 72 of the Court of Appeal Rules, the Registrar found that most of the legal work was properly or reasonably necessary, even though the underlying appeal involved small amounts and no complex, difficult, or novel legal issues.
The Registrar concluded that Zhang’s conduct transformed what should have been a straightforward and inexpensive appeal into a procedurally intricate matter. Serial amendments, delay, more than 80 emails, last-minute submissions and evidence, the problematic affidavit, and disregard of court directions unnecessarily lengthened the proceeding and increased the strata’s costs.
The amount claimed was nevertheless reduced for excessive photocopying, clerical or overhead work billed as legal-assistant time, unnecessary tasks, travel charged at counsel’s full rate, some work on an abandoned proposal for a consent appeal, and excessive preparation costs for the assessment itself. After those reductions, the Registrar certified costs of $39,703.92.
Key Takeaways
- A special-costs assessment asks what a reasonable client would pay a reasonably competent lawyer for work properly or reasonably necessary to conduct the proceeding.
- A non-lawyer agent has no automatic or continuing right of audience; permission remains discretionary and may be denied when authority and effective representation are in doubt.
- Even after special costs are ordered, claimed fees remain subject to scrutiny, and excessive copying, overhead, unnecessary work, travel charges, and duplicative preparation may be reduced.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the substantial financial consequences of litigation misconduct even where the underlying monetary dispute is modest. Conduct that causes delay, introduces unreliable evidence, or disregards procedural directions can make otherwise simple litigation expensive and support recovery of special costs.
It also underscores the Court of Appeal’s control over appearances by non-lawyer agents. A party relying on an agent may be required to establish the agent’s authority and explain why representation by the agent is necessary or proper; a power of attorney does not itself guarantee a right of audience.