Background:
Lois Anne Opatril, the petitioner, and Lindsay Colinne Horton, the respondent, co-owned a property in Vernon, British Columbia, as tenants-in-common. Opatril sought an order to sell the property under the Partition of Property Act (PPA), citing an alleged verbal agreement that the property would be sold or her share bought out after five years. Horton opposed the sale, claiming a differing agreement that limited Opatril’s entitlement to $120,000 of the equity.

Key Legal Issues:

1. Verbal Agreement: Opatril argued the agreement involved a sale or equal division of equity, while Horton contended it capped Opatril’s share.
2. Partition and Sale: Opatril relied on s. 6 of the PPA, which allows the court to order a sale if it serves justice.
3. Promissory Estoppel: Horton raised this defense to argue reliance on Opatril's representations.
4. Credibility and Evidence: Conflicting affidavit evidence required the court to assess witness credibility, necessitating a trial.

Court's Ruling:
The court found the matter could not be resolved through affidavit evidence alone and ordered the case to proceed to trial. Cross-examinations and proper pleadings were deemed necessary to determine the credibility of competing claims.

Costs and Awards:
No final costs or awards were determined as the case was remitted to trial.