A common lease separation agreement allows co-owners to separate their interests and thus become common tenants. Since tenants are not allowed to survive together, they can freely sell their real estate shares or transfer them to others.  Ownership can be converted from one form to another without severance pay, but not by unilateral action. For example, it is possible to turn land into money or vice versa without necessarily separating the common lease. The law does not allow less common rent on private property than in real estate, so that a common tenancy agreement can be maintained after a sale of land by all co-owners, as the condominium may continue to exist with respect to the proceeds of the sale: Allingham v. Allingham,  VLR 469; Walker at paragraph 41. However, if the proceeds of the sale are split, the four units will be destroyed and, subsequently, the joint lease will be separated: Flannigan at 665-666; Tessier in The Parades 11-12; Compared to 345.  At Stonehouse, British Columbia (Attorney General), 1961 Canlii 48 (CSC),  S.C.R. 103, the Supreme Court of Canada considered a previous provision similar to LTA 20. On the basis of the exception for the manufacturer of the deed, the court held an unregured transfer executed by a tenant executed the common rent. This result followed because, without claiming to give the interest of the other tenant by dealing with his own, the assigning roommate changed the character of the other into a tenancy agreement, which was common by law.
The exception in the statutory provision confirms the common law regime.  Furthermore, I see no reason to limit Southin J.A.`s Rule 3, “facts that prevent one of the parties from arguing that there was no agreement” in cases where trusted persons were affected, nor do I think it necessarily did. On the contrary, southin J.A. argued in The Case, which alone allows the respondent to assert reversion rights, given the marital context and the conduct of the parties, which did not involve any element of reliability, contrary to the conduct at issue in the case. However, in different facts, it may be unfair to do so when the co-owners have expressed a common intention to treat their interests as many. Depending on the circumstances, this may apply regardless of whether an adverse dependence can be proven: Hansen Estate in Paras. 35-51.  If a tenant transfers his property interest, the unit of the property is broken and the severance pay follows, subject to a legal provision to the contrary. In some title registration systems, for example, a transfer must be registered or the co-owner`s consent must be obtained before severance pay takes effect: see Land Titles Act, 2000, S.S.
2000, v. L-5.1, p. 156. In British Columbia, see 18(3) of the Property Law Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, approximately 377 provides that a tenant can share a joint tenancy agreement by transfer of ownership, without the co-owners being informed and, on page 30 of the act and equity, R.S.B.C 1996, about 253 allows the personal property to be separated from themselves and another.