I note that in Kelt v. British Columbia (Assessor of Area No. 4 - Central Vancouver Island), 2015 BCSC 1475, Dorgan J. observed that while the court has no jurisdiction to amend the questions as stated, it “should strive to interpret the questions charitably and persuasively before providing an answer, particularly where the appellants are self-represented” (at para. 32). In addition, the court may also rely on the parties’ submissions to clarify the questions and as a last resort, the court may remit the stated case back to the Board for amendment. In my view, those principles apply equally here as the applicant is self-represented.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.