The applicant sought specific performance of an Agreement of Purchase and Sale for a residential property.
The respondent vendor refused to close the transaction after realizing that the contract stipulated HST was 'included in' the purchase price, meaning she would net less than anticipated.
The respondent argued there was a lack of consensus ad idem and unilateral mistake.
The court rejected these arguments, finding the contract language unambiguous and the mistake to be the respondent's own error in judgment.
The court granted specific performance, holding that the property was unique in the context of a hot real estate market and damages would be inadequate.
