John Foster
Associate
John's Contact Details
jfoster@djacounsel.comDirect: (778) 504-8757Direct: (778) 504-8757 LinkedIn download v-card Recommend John
John's Assistant
Biography
John Foster is a civil and commercial litigator. In addition to regularly acting in complex corporate and commercial disputes, his practice includes prosecuting and defending professional negligence claims, insurance coverage claims, shareholder disputes, commercial and residential real estate disputes, recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, construction claims, wills and estates litigation and appeals.
John regularly appears as counsel in all levels of court in B.C., as well as appearing in Federal Court.
John is an active member of the legal community, and regularly volunteers his time as an executive of the Civil Litigation and Legal Research Sections of the Canadian Bar Association, BC Branch; judging 1L moots at the Peter A. Allard School of Law; and mentoring law students as part of the Canadian Bar Association’s mentorship program.
Publications
- John G. M. Foster, “Singh v Minhas, 2023 BCCA 7”, Counsel Comments, Take Five, Issue: February, 2023, P. 17.
Education
- J.D., University of Calgary, 2020
- B.A. (Honours with Distinction), Anthropology, University of Victoria, 2014
Associations
- Member, Law Society of British Columbia
- Executive, Canadian Bar Association, BC Branch, Civil Litigation Section
- Executive, Canadian Bar Association, BC Branch, Legal Research Section
Bar Admissions
- British Columbia, 2021
Notable Cases
Singh v Minhas, 2023 BCCA 7
John Foster, acting alongside Quang Duong of MacKenzie Fujisawa LLP, successfully defended their earlier win at the British Columbia Supreme Court, which found no liability on the part of a notary public in connection with a real estate transaction.
Shanghai Zhong Jia Xing Hua Chuang Ye Investment LLP v Bai, 2022 BCSC 935
John Foster, acting alongside Quang Duong of MacKenzie Fujisawa LLP, successfully permanently stayed the majority of the plaintiffs’ claims against the defendants on the grounds that China was the more appropriate forum for the claims to be heard.