Sabrina Saltmarsh presented as a Panelist at this year’s Unveiling Scary Issues, Frauds and Failures in Ontario Property Transactions, held by the Ontario Bar Association. The Panel discussion included: A cautionary tale for lawyers about potential signs of fraud in real estate transactions and insights and tips from Lawpro; the role of certificates of pending litigation in the preservation of rights and assets when dealing with fraud in real property transactions; and a discussion of the recent Court of Appeal ruling of Froom v. LaFontaine, 2023 ONSC 318, as it relates to the theory of deferred indefeasibility. Sabrina provided insights to the audience of real estate solicitors and litigators on challenging and unique issues related to fraud litigation and important principles and strategy considerations in obtaining or discharging a certificate of pending litigation related to real property. Lawyers at Gilbertson Davis LLP, have experience in representing parties in fraud litigation … Read More
Can’t Get Financing On Time? You May Lose Your Deposit – Toronto Real Estate Lawyers
In the recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA”), Nguyen v. Zaza, 2023 ONCA 34, the ONCA dismissed the appellant’s appeal from a decision of a judge of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to grant the respondent’s summary judgment motion and order forfeiture of the appellant’s deposit of $50,000 to the respondent (among other relief). The appellant was the purchaser and the respondent was the seller of the subject property. The agreement of purchase and sale at the center of the dispute between the parties specifically indicated that time was of the essence. Originally, the agreement was conditional on the appellant arranging financing and a satisfactory home inspection, but the appellant waived those conditions prior to closing. The motion judge found that on the closing date the respondent was ready, willing, and able, to close whereas the appellant did not tender the purchase price required from her … Read More
To Sue or Not to Sue? Failure to Sue = No Compensation
In Griffiths v. Zambosco, 2001 CanLII 24097 (ON CA), the Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA”) concluded that failure to sue is a bar to recovery of any compensation, even if the party to a lawsuit may otherwise have been entitled to compensation had she sued. In this case the Plaintiff sued the Appellant for negligence in respect of a vendor take back mortgage to the Plaintiff and his then-wife. The Plaintiff’s ex-wife refused to join the proceeding as a plaintiff and so the Plaintiff added her as a defendant. The trial judge found that the Appellant was negligent and awarded damages of close to $300,000 to both the Plaintiff and his ex-wife (almost $150,000 each). On appeal, the ONCA agreed with the trial judge that the Appellant owed a duty of care to both the Plaintiff and to the Plaintiff’s ex-wife. However, the ONCA did not agree with the trial … Read More
Entire Agreement Clause Not A Shield To Fraudulent Misrepresentation
In the recent Court of Appeal ruling of 10443204 Canada Inc. v. 2701835 Ontario Inc., 2022 ONCA 745, the Court of Appeal clarified that entire agreement clauses in contracts do not shield any representor or deprive any party to a contract from remedies available for a fraudulent misrepresentation. Background In May of 2019 the appellant Chirag Patel and his corporation 2701835 Ontario Inc. (the appellants) entered into a purchase agreement (the “APS”) with the respondent 10443204 Canada Inc. (the respondent), related to the purchase of a coin laundry business located in Brampton. The APS contained an entire agreement clause of which the relevant part indicated: “There is no representation, warranty, collateral agreement or condition, affecting this Agreement other than as expressed herein.” In accordance with amended terms to the APS concerning the purchase price the appellants made a partial payment of $100,000 on closing and the balance of the purchase … Read More
Aborting A Real Estate Deal Can Have Major Consequences
A recent Court of Appeal ruling illustrates the severe consequences that can flow from aborting a real estate transaction. In the decision of Joo v. Tran, 2021 ONCA 107, the Court of Appeal declined to give effect to a term that was included in an agreement of purchase and sale (APS), on the basis that such an interpretation of the clause would have resulted in an absurdity. The clause indicated that the vendors would discharge any encumbrances on or before closing, either through sale proceeds or by way of a solicitor’s undertaking, which term was included in Schedule A of the APS. The decision arose from the appeal of a ruling on a summary judgment motion brought by the seller, who sued the purchaser in a real estate transaction for breach of contract, after the purchaser expressing concerns regarding utility easements on the property, aborted the real estate transaction. The … Read More
Five Reasons People Sue After Buying or Selling Real Estate
In a heated real estate market where blind bidding and unconditional offers are necessary to compete, often times purchasers are vulnerable to pulling the trigger and asking questions afterwards. Conversely sellers are looking to capitalize on market highs and looking to sell for top dollar which often comes down to timing. These competing interests can lead to litigation when a real estate transaction doesn’t go as planned. Here are five common reasons that litigation arises from real estate transactions: 1) Breach of Contract Litigation often arises because a seller or purchaser has breached the purchase and sale agreement. There are many contractual terms that set out the rights and obligations of the respective parties in a real estate transaction including the closing date, title clearance, deposit requirements, inclusions, exclusions, and conditions. A Plaintiff commencing suit over a breach of the contract must prove that they have complied with all of … Read More
A Guide to Urgent Residential Eviction Orders and Enforcement During COVID-19
On March 19, 2020, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice suspended the eviction of residents from their homes, pursuant to eviction orders issued by the Landlord and Tenant Board or writs of possession, during the COVID-19 pandemic, unless ordered otherwise in an urgent motion. On the same day, the Landlord and Tenant Board suspended all hearings related to eviction applications and suspended the issuance of eviction orders, unless the matter related to an urgent issue such as an illegal act or a serious safety threat. Urgent Eviction Order or Urgent Enforcement? 1. If the landlord requires an urgent eviction order, then the landlord should proceed to file an urgent application with the Landlord and Tenant Board. 2. If the landlord already has an eviction order (or writ of possession) and requires urgent enforcement, then an urgent motion should be made to the Superior Court of Justice under Rule 60.17 of … Read More
COVID-19 / Coronavirus: Are Closing Dates Extended Due to Construction Sites Closing?
On April 3, 2020, the Ontario government ordered that further non-essential businesses must close by April 4, 2020 at 11:59 p.m. including closing down most construction sites in order to flatten the curve of the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of essential businesses was reduced from 74 to 44. The revised list of essential businesses can be found here. Construction sites related to the healthcare sector, provincial infrastructure such as transit, and projects related to the production of ventilators and other products directly related to fighting COVID-19 were permitted to remain open. Residential construction sites were permitted to remain open where: (i) a footing permit has been granted for single family, semi-detached and townhouses; (ii) an above grade structural permit has been granted for condominiums; or (iii) the work was related to renovations and started before April 4, 2020. Given the expansive definition of essential residential construction sites, it appears that … Read More
COVID-19 / Coronavirus: Urgent Hearings for Real Estate Closings
Following on my blog on scheduling urgent hearings for commercial lease matters, this blog is on the scheduling of an urgent hearing involving a real estate closing. In Ali v. Tariq, 2020 ONSC 1695, the applicant had sold her property and discovered that a writ of execution had been registered against her property during routine searches performed for the closing. Apparently, her former father-in-law had obtained default judgment against her in small claims court and obtained a writ of execution at around the time of her divorce. A writ of execution filed in the county or district in which the property is located will effectively prevent the sale of the property until the judgment is set aside or fully satisfied. After the applicant’s offer to pay the sale proceeds into her lawyer’s trust account was rejected, the applicant sought an urgent hearing before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice under … Read More
Ontario Introduces Bill to Update Rules for Realtors
Last week, the Ontario government introduced the Trust in Real Estate Services Act, 2019 to update the current legislation that governs Ontario’s more than 86,000 real estate professionals. Yesterday, the bill passed second reading and was referred to the Standing Committee for witness testimony and further amendments. The stated goals of the proposed legislation include improving consumer protection and choice in the market and improving professionalism among real estate professionals and brokerages through enhanced ethical requirements. Some of the more significant proposed changes include: Disclosing Details of Competing Bids – At the seller’s option, the seller’s real estate agent may disclose the details of competing offers to other bidders. Currently, the seller’s agent is required to disclose the number of competing offers to all buyers who have submitted a written offer but the purchase price and conditions remain confidential. Clients vs. Customers – There will no longer be “clients” and … Read More
Deposits In Failed Real Property Transactions
The recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Azzarello v. Shawqi, 2019 ONCA 820, illustrates the purpose of providing a deposit when purchasing real property and under what circumstances a purchaser will lose their deposit or be refunded the deposit if the sale does not go through. There are some important general principles that purchasers and sellers should be aware of regarding deposits in a real estate transaction: 1) Contemplation Regarding The Deposit In the Contract Is Important Purchasers and sellers should carefully consider the terms to be included in the purchase and sale agreement regarding the deposit. The contract should be clear about what happens to the deposit in all possible scenarios. In cases where it is not, the courts will look to implied terms in the contract and existing case law which governs how deposits are dealt with. 2) The Reason The Sale Fell Apart Is Important The … Read More
Restriction on Use of Summary Judgment Where Key Issues Turn on Credibility
Since the Supreme Court of Canada’s landmark decision in Hryniak v Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, summary judgment has been lauded as an effective tool to enhance access to justice and achieve cost-effective results for litigants. Indeed, in recent years, summary judgment motions have become more common, making trials in civil litigation a rare occurrence. But has the pendulum begun to swing now in the opposite direction? The Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Lesenko v Guerette, 2017 ONCA 522, challenges the limits of summary judgment, and outlines that it may not be appropriate in cases where key issues turn on the credibility of the parties. In Lesenko, a husband, his wife, and his sister decided to sell their respective homes and buy a house together. The sister sold her home, and some of those sale proceeds went to pay for the entire purchase price of the subject property. The sister … Read More