A Calgary agent has launched a petition calling on Alberta’s major real estate organizations to halt ongoing legal battles and return to the negotiating table, arguing the disputes are costly, damaging and ultimately borne by members themselves.
Robyn Moser, a sales associate with Remax Realty Professionals, says current litigation between the Calgary Real Estate Board (CREB), the Realtors Association of Edmonton (RAE) and the Alberta Real Estate Association (AREA) stems from a long-running territorial dispute following a failed vote to amalgamate several years ago.
Moser says the lawsuit is hurting the profession’s reputation and draining resources that could be better spent supporting members and the public. Her petition has received nearly 200 signatures.
Statement of claim
On Jan. 19, lawyers for AREA and CEO Brad Mitchell filed a statement of claim in the Court King’s Bench of Alberta. The plaintiffs are listed as AREA and Mitchell.
The defendants are the Calgary Real Estate Board Co-operative Limited (CREB); the Edmonton Real Estate Board Co-operative Listing Bureau Limited, doing business as the Realtors Association of Edmonton (RAE); three CREB leaders; RAE’s board chair; and Shirley Williams, a RAE director who previously served on AREA’s board, according to the claim.
“Between 2020 and 2023, CREB repeatedly approached AREA about a merger. The two organizations negotiated and agreed to a merger proposal, which would have resulted in a consolidation of the two organizations’ assets, operations and personnel with Mitchell becoming Chief Executive Officer of the merged entity. The boards of both AREA and CREB proposed the merger to their respective members, advocating for it as a way to combine resources, streamline member services and reduce annual membership dues,” according to the statement of claim.
“On or about March 15, 2023, the membership of CREB voted against merging with AREA. Since the failed merger vote, and at all material times, CREB and RAE have become increasingly hostile to AREA and Mitchell. In particular, the Defendants perceive AREA and Mitchell as posing threats to their interests, power and influence.”
Disputes that followed the failed vote
The statement of claim also points to disputes after the merger vote, including disagreements over the province’s residential measurement standard and, later, governance and control issues tied to Pillar 9, a for-profit Alberta company that operates a listing database used by boards across the province.
AREA alleges CREB and RAE “organized” to undermine AREA’s interests in Pillar 9 by seeking to have AREA’s shares transferred to RAE — an allegation CREB and RAE have not addressed publicly in responses to the claim. None of the allegations has been proven in court.
“The Defendants, individually and in concert with each other, have made defamatory statements regarding Mitchell as part of a coordinated effort by the Defendants to undermine Mitchell’s leadership by destroying his reputation, with the ultimate goal of forcing AREA to terminate Mitchell’s employment and thus neutralizing the perceived threat that AREA and Mitchell posed to their own interests, power and influence.”
The statement of claim lists a series of statements it alleges were defamatory, including statements contained in letters sent to AREA board chair Christopher Hassall on Nov. 12, 2025. In the claim, AREA quotes the RAE letter as warning Mitchell’s conduct posed a “material risk to AREA members,” while the claim says the CREB letter urged AREA to fire him, alleging “unprofessional and unbecoming conduct.”
The lawsuit also alleges some defendants repeated allegations to members that Mitchell was “under investigation by the ASC” and that he “had appeared while intoxicated.” Mitchell denies the allegations, and the defendants deny the claim’s allegations.
When contacted by REM, Mitchell said he couldn’t comment as the matter is before the courts.
When asked about the lawsuit, both CREB and RAE denied the allegations in individual statements and would not comment further as the matter is before the courts.
In addition to damages, the lawsuit asks for injunctions, including an order “restraining the Defendants from defaming” AREA and Mitchell. It also seeks orders requiring Shirley Williams, the former AREA director named in the court docs, and CREB director Matthew McBean to deliver any confidential AREA information they allegedly shared or still possess, according to the claim.
‘Basically suing ourselves’
Moser says the lawsuit is hurting the profession’s reputation and draining resources that could be better spent supporting Realtors and the public. She describes the situation as “basically suing ourselves.”
She said the legal dispute “makes us look like idiots because we’re paying both sides of a lawsuit here … it makes us look disorganized. It makes us look unprofessional. You know, in my 27 years, they have played well in the sandbox together for 27 years, either figuring out how to work together or come together and build one product that we can all use.”
Moser’s petition says conflicts like this “not only tarnish the reputation of our profession but also drain valuable resources that could be better allocated to initiatives that benefit” the industry and the communities they serve.
“I have witnessed firsthand how these legal battles rarely lead to productive outcomes for any party involved. Instead, they consume enormous amounts of financial resources — often reaching into the hundreds of thousands, or even millions of dollars — funds which originate from members’ dues. Such expenditures are a significant burden on our professional community, diverting attention and funds away from essential services and member support initiatives,” notes the petition.
“I propose a two-fold solution: First, CREB and RAE should retract their statements against AREA and issue sincere apologies. This would not only restore some degree of goodwill but also pave the way for open dialogue. Second, AREA should withdraw its litigation against CREB and RAE, facilitating an environment where real discussions about reconciliation and progress can take place.”
In its statement of claim, AREA points to the Nov. 12 letters and subsequent alleged repeats of the allegations as central to what it says is defamation.
Responses from RAE and CREB
While CREB did not comment on the lawsuit explicitly, CREB’s Associate CEO, Lisa Latchford, did respond to questions via email. She says the board is a “financially healthy” organization and the legal action won’t affect the “day-to-day business.”
She went on to say that CREB “is committed to having a constructive relationship with our provincial association and we would have strongly preferred to work out any differences with AREA in a professional manner outside of the courts.”
Latchford continued, “If we all work with the best interests of our members as the priority, it is our hope that the industry as a whole can come out of this situation stronger.”
Mario Toneguzzi is a contributing writer for REM. He has more than 40 years of experience as a daily newspaper writer, columnist, and editor. He worked for 35 years at the Calgary Herald, covering sports, crime, politics, health, faith, city and breaking news, and business. He now works on his own as a freelance writer for several national publications and consultant in communications and media relations/training. Mario was named in 2021 as one of the Top 10 Business Journalists in the World by PR News – the only Canadian to make the list.
This article appears to be premature and does not reflect the full legal context of the matter currently before the Court of King’s Bench.
Litigation follows established legal procedure. It is entirely possible that settlement discussions have already occurred or are ongoing, as is common in civil disputes. Suggesting that parties simply “withdraw” claims without understanding that process overlooks how these matters are properly addressed within our legal system.
It is also important for members to recognize that the named defendants include the Calgary Real Estate Board and the Realtors Association of Edmonton. These are separate legal entities from the provincial association, each with its own governance structure and fiduciary responsibilities. While members pay dues to both organizations, this is not “suing ourselves” in a legal sense, it is a dispute between distinct corporate bodies.
If anything, members ultimately benefit from clarity and accountability. When serious governance concerns arise, the courts provide a structured and impartial forum to resolve them. Allowing that process to unfold ensures that leadership conduct, authority, and responsibilities are properly examined and defined for the long-term health of the profession.
Members deserve transparency, professionalism, and governance that strengthens, not weakens, confidence in our industry.
I understand the frustration from the petition. No one wants members’ dues funding litigation, but it’s important to acknowledge what brought us here.
Governance involves risk management. It is not simply a box for the committee to check or the “boring” agenda item. This is the place that an Audit & Risk Committee could have been pivotal. When serious governance issues arise, boards have a fiduciary duty to address them. Before litigation was a consideration, the correct path should have been an independent review through the appropriate third-party channels.
If the alleged behaviours are true, an internal review or audit would have clarified the path forward. If the alleged behaviours are untrue, that same process would protect reputations and restore trust. If the allegations that responses were retaliatory, the same path would have unearthed it.
I don’t like the optics of organizations suing member volunteers, or orgs funded by their members getting into legal dealings with one another. I don’t like that available governance channels don’t appear to be fully tested. When litigation has become the tool of governance, it indicates that the governance process itself has broken down.
Organized real estate works because of the governance that underpins it. If it doesn’t work, then we have a larger issue to discuss.
Finally, some common sense. As real estate pratitioners, we are regulated by numerous entities including our associations such as RAE, CREB, AREA and CREA that would do well to remember they work for us. (There is also a duty upon us members to treat them with common courtesy. Respect is always a two-way street. Perhaps this is where the answer lies?) With such a level of organization, there is always lurking the dangers of overlap and cost overruns, the costs of which are ultimately borne by membership.
When we deal with many of the same faces day in and day out, it is not hard for time to wear on us, and for the little daily challenges we face to accumulate. Little things can turn into big things and animosities have fertile ground to grow in.
When we get to the point we are suing ourselves, and make no mistake, that is exactly what is happening, it is time for each of us to take a long, hard look in the mirror. It is not our job to make someone else better, it is our job to make ourselves better.
To argue there are “legal differences” between organizations and so we are not suing ourselves, is arguing semantics. The same people on both sides are paying the bills for this and we demand to have a say. I only speak for myself in this, but I say stop, now.
No, there is no need for litigation. Anyone who says there is has never been through a tough litigation (or lives for controversy); other than the lawyers there are only losers in litigation. Those who know me know I am a bit too stubborn about right and wrong, I see little grey area. I fought a wrongful action because I was right; I won but I lost. The personal and financial costs take their toll (and we settled before it even got to court! It goes to court, the costs rise exponentially). Nobody wins. Virtually any reasonable lawyer will tell you that.
I don’t know if letters or allegations should be withdrawn and apologized for; these matters are never that simple and can stretch back a long way, but without doubt, the lawsuit needs to stop immediately and an arbitrator needs to be brought in. I am tired of my money being spent on numerous, and seemingly increasing, lawsuits and always being told “we can’t comment” but we need your money.
It’s easy to fight something out and claim “I’m doing it for you.” Thank you, I don’t need anyone to do anything for me but play nice in the sandbox.
Thanks Robyn, I will sign.