Certificate of Pending Litigation: A BC Buyer's Options

The short version

A certificate of pending litigation is a notice that somebody has gone to court claiming an interest in that land. It is registered against the title in the same way a charge is registered, so it shows up on a title search.
While it sits there, the land title office is barred from registering anything that charges or transfers the land. That includes your transfer and your lender’s mortgage. This is the sentence that stops your purchase, and it is not discretionary.
There are two ways you can still register, if you decide to accept the risk. Both require you to say in writing that you take the title subject to whatever the court decides. Your lender is unlikely to agree.
If your transfer was already in the registry’s queue before the certificate arrived, the rules change in your favour — with one exception, and it is a wills claim.
You do not have to own the land to apply to have a certificate cancelled. The Land Title Act lets a person who claims to be entitled to an interest in land apply, and says a non-party applies by petition. A buyer under contract is exactly who that describes.
The estate’s or the owner’s own lawyer cannot lift it for you. Five separate routes exist; the cheapest by far is the plaintiff signing a written request.
Nobody is going to tell you about any of this. The registry’s own page for property owners does not use the words “buyer” or “purchaser” once.

You did your subject removal, your financing is approved, and a week before completion your notary calls with a problem. There is a certificate of pending litigation on the title. Somebody is suing about the property, and until that is dealt with, your purchase cannot be registered.

Here is the short answer. The contract is still alive and so is the lawsuit, but the land title office is now barred from registering your transfer. You have more moves than most people are told about, including one the law gives you directly as a buyer. This page sets out what the Land Title Act actually says, section by section, and what it does not say.

Every provision quoted below was read in the Province’s own consolidation of the Land Title Act on 9 November 2026 — the certificate of pending litigation provisions in Part 14 of the Land Title Act, and the cancellation provisions in Part 16. That file printed “current to November 3, 2026”.

What a certificate of pending litigation is

It is not a judgment. Nobody has won anything. It is a notice on the title that a court proceeding is running in which somebody claims an interest in that land.

Section 215(1) of the Land Title Act says who may register one. A person “who has commenced or is a party to a proceeding”, and who is either “claiming an estate or interest in land” or “given by another enactment a right of action in respect of land”, “may register a certificate of pending litigation against the land in the same manner as a charge is registered”.

Two things follow from that one sentence. Because it registers “in the same manner as a charge”, it appears on an ordinary title search. And because the test is a claim to an interest in land, no court has yet decided whether the claim is any good.

The same section also requires the court registrar to attach a copy of the pleading that started the proceeding. That attached document is the most useful thing in the file, because it tells you what is actually being claimed and against whom.

What people assume	What section 215 says
Someone has won a case against the seller	A proceeding has been “commenced”; nothing has been decided
It is a debt that can be paid off at completion	It is a claim to an interest in land, not a money charge you can discharge
It only shows up if you go looking for it	It is registered “in the same manner as a charge”, so it is on the title search
Only the owner can do anything about it	Sections 252 and 256 also reach a person who “claims to be entitled to” an interest in the land
You can insure around it	Nothing in the Act makes it insurable away; the registrar’s bar in section 216 is absolute until cancellation

The sentence that stops your purchase

Section 216(1) is the whole problem, in one line. After a certificate of pending litigation is registered, “the registrar must not make any entry in the register that has the effect of charging, transferring or otherwise affecting the land described in the certificate until registration of the certificate is cancelled in accordance with this Act”.

Read “must not”. There is no discretion in it and no application you can make to get around it. Your Form A transfer charges and transfers the land. So does your lender’s mortgage. Both are caught.

This is why a certificate of pending litigation behaves differently from almost anything else you find on a title. A mortgage gets discharged with money. A builders lien can be cleared by paying into court. A certificate of pending litigation comes off when the court says so, or when the person who filed it agrees to take it off, and not otherwise.

Two ways you can still register, if you choose to take the risk

Section 216(2) lists the exceptions to that bar. Most of them are not about buyers — priority agreements, assignments of earlier charges, subleases, involuntary charges. Two of them are.

The first is section 216(2)(a): the bar does not apply to registering “an indefeasible title or a charge, if the instrument supporting the application is expressed to be subject to the final outcome of the proceeding”. In other words, if the transfer itself says on its face that it is subject to the outcome, the registrar may register it.

The second is section 216(2)(b), which reaches a title or charge “in respect of which the applicant, in writing, (i) elects to proceed to registration subject to the final outcome of the proceeding, and (ii) authorizes the registrar to register the title or charge claimed subject to the certificate of pending litigation”.

Before anyone suggests this as a clever fix, read section 216(3). Registration under subsection (2) “does not constitute a determination by the registrar that what was registered is not affected by the final outcome of the proceeding”, and “is subject to the final outcome of the proceeding if what was registered is affected by that outcome”.

So this is not a safe harbour. It is a written election to buy the lawsuit along with the house. You would become the registered owner, and if the claimant wins, your title is affected by that result. A lender asked to advance against a title registered on those terms will usually decline, which in practice decides the question for most buyers.

If your transfer was already in the queue

Timing changes everything, and this is the part almost nobody explains.

Section 217(1) lets the registrar, “despite section 216”, complete the registration of a title or charge “that was applied for before an application to register a certificate of pending litigation was received by the registrar”. Note what the comparison is: not the day you signed, not the completion date, but which application the registrar received first.

Then section 217(2) splits by whether you are a party to the lawsuit.

Under 217(2)(a), if the earlier applicant is a party to the proceeding, the registrar must register their title “subject to the certificate of pending litigation”. Under 217(2)(b), if the earlier applicant is not a party, the registrar must register the title and “cancel the registration of the certificate and give notice of the cancellation to the person who applied to register it”.

That second outcome is a genuinely good result for an ordinary buyer who had nothing to do with the dispute and whose paperwork happened to arrive first: the certificate comes off.

Situation	Provision	What the registrar must do
Certificate registered before your application	s. 216(1)	Register nothing that charges or transfers the land, until cancellation
You elect in writing to take the outcome risk	s. 216(2)(a), (b)	May register your title, subject to the final outcome
Your application received first, and you are a party to the case	s. 217(2)(a)	Register your title subject to the certificate
Your application received first, and you are not a party	s. 217(2)(b)	Register your title and cancel the certificate
Your application received first, but the case is a wills claim or a family property claim	s. 217(2)(c)(ii), (iii)	Register your title subject to the certificate, “whether or not the prior applicant is a party”

The exception with no escape hatch, and it is a wills claim

This is the single most important thing on this page, and we could not find it stated anywhere else.

Section 217(2)(c) carves three kinds of case out of the good outcome in 217(2)(b). Where the certificate relates to a proceeding “in respect of a charge, or to enforce, foreclose or cancel a registered charge”, or one “referred to in section 215 (6)”, or one “referred to in section 215 (7)”, the registrar “must register the indefeasible title or charge claimed by the prior applicant, subject to the certificate of pending litigation, whether or not the prior applicant is a party to the proceeding”.

Section 215(6) is a Family Law Act property division claim. Section 215(7) is “a person who has commenced an action under the Wills, Estates and Succession Act” — in practice, most often somebody challenging a will.

So an innocent buyer who filed first still takes subject to a wills certificate. That by itself is in the statute for anyone to read. The part that matters is what happens next.

Section 256(2) gives a registered owner in exactly that position a fast way out. An owner whose title “is registered subject to a certificate of pending litigation under section 217 (2) (a) or (c) (ii)” may swear an affidavit saying the attached pleading “contains no allegation that the owner is not a purchaser in good faith and for valuable consideration”, and that they applied to register before the certificate was received. On that showing, section 257(4) lets the court “make an order declaring that the owner’s indefeasible title or charge is not affected by the certificate of pending litigation or the outcome of the proceeding”, and under section 257(5) the registrar must then cancel the certificate.

Now read the list in section 256(2) again. It says “section 217 (2) (a) or (c) (ii)”. It does not say (c)(iii).

A buyer caught by a Family Law Act certificate under 215(6) and 217(2)(c)(ii) has the good-faith-purchaser declaration available. A buyer caught by a wills certificate under 215(7) and 217(2)(c)(iii) is outside that subsection, and is left with the general route in section 256(1), which turns on proving “that hardship and inconvenience are experienced or are likely to be experienced by the registration” — and where the court, under section 257(1)(a), may cancel only on being satisfied “that an order requiring security to be given is proper in the circumstances and that damages will provide adequate relief”, and on the applicant actually giving that security.

	Family property certificate	Wills certificate
Registered under	s. 215(6)	s. 215(7)
If you filed first, you take	Subject to it, s. 217(2)(c)(ii)	Subject to it, s. 217(2)(c)(iii)
Good-faith purchaser declaration in s. 256(2)	Available	Not available — the subsection does not list (c)(iii)
What is left to you	s. 257(4) order that your title is unaffected	s. 256(1) hardship application, with security under s. 257(1)(a)

The practical lesson is blunt. If the certificate on your title arises from a will dispute, being an honest buyer who paid full market value does not get you the same protection it would in a family property case. Treat a wills certificate as the most serious version of this problem, and get your own lawyer on it before you remove any subject or extend any date.

You do not have to own the land to ask the court to cancel it

Most writing on this subject assumes the only person who can move against a certificate is the registered owner. The Act is wider than that, twice.

Section 252(1) applies where a certificate has been registered “and no step has been taken in the proceeding for one year”. It then says “any person who is the registered owner of or claims to be entitled to an estate or interest in land against which the certificate has been registered may apply for an order that the registration of the certificate be cancelled”. Section 252(2)(b) spells out how a non-party does it: “by petition, if the applicant is not a party”.

Section 256(1) uses the same opening words — “A person who is the registered owner of or claims to be entitled to an estate or interest in land” — for the hardship application.

A buyer holding a signed contract of purchase and sale is a person claiming to be entitled to an interest in that land. That is a claim resting on the contract being specifically enforceable, not a right the Act hands you outright, so it is a point for your lawyer and not something to assume. But the statute plainly contemplates an applicant who is neither the owner nor a party to the lawsuit, and it tells that person which door to use.

Worth knowing for the same reason: the buyer’s own tool, if the seller simply refuses to complete, is a certificate of pending litigation of your own under section 215(1)(a). It stands or falls with your claim to the land, so it is not a step to take lightly.

The five ways a certificate comes off a title

They are not equal. The first three are administrative and quick. The last two mean a court application.

Route	Provision	What has to happen	Court needed
The claimant simply asks	s. 255(1)	A written request from “the party initiating the proceedings or the party’s solicitor”, in a form satisfactory to the registrar	No
The action is discontinued	s. 253	Application, plus a certificate from the court registrar that the action has been discontinued as to that land	No
The action is dismissed	s. 254	Application, plus a court registrar’s certificate endorsed by the registrar of the Court of Appeal, confirming dismissal and that the appeal time has expired with no appeal filed	No
The case has gone quiet	s. 252(1)	No step taken in the proceeding for one year; owner or interest claimant applies; a non-party applies by petition	Yes
Hardship, or good-faith purchaser	ss. 256, 257	Hardship and inconvenience under s. 256(1), usually with security; or the s. 256(2) affidavit where it is available	Yes

Look at the first row before anything else. Section 255(1) means a certificate can come off on a written request from the person who filed it, with no court order at all. Where the claim is really about money and the claimant can be paid or secured, that is the route that actually closes deals. It is also the one most often overlooked, because everyone starts drafting a court application.

Note what section 254 demands for a dismissal: not just a dismissal, but a certificate endorsed by the registrar of the Court of Appeal showing the appeal period has run out. A case you were told was “thrown out last month” may not yet be capable of clearing the title.

What the Act does not give you

Three absences are worth as much as the provisions, and all three were checked rather than assumed.

First, there is no section of the Land Title Act that awards damages for a certificate registered without good reason. Part 14, Division 3 of the Act contains only sections 215, 216 and 217. Part 16 runs from section 241 to section 258 and covers cancellation. Nothing in either imposes a penalty for an unjustified filing. What the Act offers instead is section 257(1)(b): where the court refuses to cancel, it may order the claimant “to enter into an undertaking to abide by any order that the court may make as to damages properly payable to the owner as a result of the registration of the certificate of pending litigation”, and to give security. Section 257(3) adds that in setting that security the court may take into account “the probability of the party’s success in the action”.

Second, nothing in the Act sets a time limit for the registry to act, and nothing sets a time limit on the lawsuit. The only fixed period in this corner of the Act is the one year of inactivity in section 252(1).

Third, and this one is a fair measure of how little is written for buyers: the Land Title and Survey Authority’s own public page on certificates of pending litigation, read on 9 November 2026, does not contain the word “buyer” or the word “purchaser” anywhere in it. It is written for owners and for the professionals who file these documents. What it does tell you is useful — a certificate “must be filed electronically by a professional (lawyer, notary public or registry agent)”, “in person and mail submissions are not accepted”, and only “in extraordinary circumstances may the Registrar allow a CPL to be filed outside the electronic process”.

That last point cuts both ways and is quietly reassuring. A disgruntled neighbour cannot walk into a land title office and put a certificate on your seller’s title. A lawyer or notary has to file it, electronically, and a court proceeding has to exist first.

Who can register one against the place you are buying

Knowing the category tells you how worried to be, because the category decides which of the rules above applies to you.

Who	Provision	Typical dispute
Anyone in a proceeding claiming an estate or interest in the land	s. 215(1)(a)	A competing buyer, a claimed trust interest, a boundary or easement fight
Anyone given a right of action in respect of land by another enactment	s. 215(1)(b)	Statutory claims against the land
A person enforcing a restrictive covenant or building scheme	s. 215(5)	A breach alleged against the property
A party to a Family Law Act property division proceeding	s. 215(6)	A separating spouse protecting a claim to the home
A person who has commenced an action under the Wills, Estates and Succession Act	s. 215(7)	A will being challenged by a spouse or child
A judgment creditor applying under the Fraudulent Preference Act	s. 215(8)	An allegedly improper transfer being attacked

One timing rule is worth carrying in your head if the seller has died. Under section 61(5) of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, read in the Province’s consolidation on 9 November 2026 and current to November 3, 2026, a person claiming a variation of a will “may register” a certificate of pending litigation “within 10 days from the date of the issue of the initiating pleading”. The word is “may”, not “must” — so a will claim can be running without anything on the title yet.

Related, and reassuring in the other direction: section 68 of the same Act provides that an order varying a will “does not bind land unless the order is registered, in the land title office in which the title to the land is registered, as a charge against the land affected”.

What it costs, and what it does not

The registry charges are small and are not the issue. The cost of this problem is time, legal fees and a completion date you cannot meet.

The Land Title and Survey Authority’s customer fee listing, “as at April 1, 2026”, prices a title search at $11.06, registering an indefeasible title at $83.82, and filing a transparency declaration at $10.61.

Nothing in the Act or the fee listing puts a price on cancelling a certificate, because cancellation is either a registry application supported by somebody else’s document or a court application. A court application is a legal cost, and your lawyer should give you a range before you start.

What to do this week

In order, and the first two are the same day.

Get the attached pleading. Section 215(1) requires a copy of the document that started the proceeding to be attached to the certificate. Read it. It tells you who is claiming what, and therefore which of the rules above governs your deal.
Find out which provision the certificate was registered under. A section 215(7) wills claim is the hardest case. A money dispute capable of being secured is the easiest.
Ask the registry question, not the lawyer question. Which application did the registrar receive first, yours or the certificate’s? Section 217 turns entirely on that, and the answer is a matter of record.
Do not remove a subject or extend a date to be helpful. Extending gives the estate or the owner time; it does not give you protection. Put anything you agree to in writing, and have your own lawyer or notary draft it.
Ask your lender before you ask anything else. If you were thinking about the written election in section 216(2)(b), their answer usually ends the discussion.
Ask whether the claimant will sign a section 255(1) request. It is the only route that needs no court and no judge, and it is the one people forget.

Questions people actually ask

Can I just complete and sort it out later?

Not in the ordinary way. Section 216(1) bars the registrar from registering your transfer at all while the certificate stands. Completing without registration means paying the price and not becoming the registered owner, which no lawyer or notary will let you do and no lender will fund.

Does my deposit come back if the deal dies over this?

Not automatically, and not just because the brokerage agrees with you. Under section 28(2) of the Real Estate Services Act, read in the Province’s consolidation on 9 November 2026 and current to November 3, 2026, a brokerage holding deposit money in its trust account holds it “as a stakeholder and not as agent for one of the parties”. Section 30(2) then allows that money to be withdrawn only as listed in section 30(1)(a) to (f), “in accordance with a written agreement of the parties to the trade in real estate”, or as the regulations allow. In plain terms: both sides sign, or a court orders it, or it goes into court. There is more on this in the deposit article linked below.

Is title insurance the answer?

It is a question for your own lawyer and your own policy wording, and it is the wrong first question. Insurance responds to loss; it does not make section 216(1) go away, and the registrar is barred from registering regardless. A certificate that is already on the title when you buy is a known problem, and known problems are the ones policies most often exclude. Read the policy, not a summary of it.

How would I have found this earlier?

A title search, which costs $11.06. The reason it is often missed is timing: a certificate registered after your subject removal will not appear on a search done before it. Asking for a fresh search close to completion is cheap insurance in the ordinary sense of the phrase.

Can the seller be forced to clear it?

That depends on your contract and is a legal question, not a registry one. What the Act makes clear is that the seller cannot clear it alone: the routes in sections 252 to 257 require either the claimant’s cooperation, a court registrar’s certificate, or a court order.

Thinking about buying or selling on the North Shore?

Leave your name and number and I will come back to you, usually the same day. Tell me the address if you have one and I will pull the sale history and the documents that matter before we talk. No charge, no obligation.

Prefer to talk now? Call or text 778-903-7306.

A Certificate of Pending Litigation on the Title: What a BC Buyer Can Do