Avrum Slodovnick

The appellants appealed a summary judgment granting the respondents $605,000 in damages for the anticipatory breach of an agreement of purchase and sale for a residential property.

The appellants argued the motion judge erred in accepting the respondents' expert appraisal of the property's value and in not sending the matter to trial due to competing expert opinions.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the motion judge's preference for the respondents' expert, who followed accepted methodologies, nor in the determination that the respondents reasonably mitigated their damages by purchasing a comparable property on the assessment date.

Following a successful motion by the plaintiff for leave to issue a certificate of pending litigation, the parties were unable to agree on costs.

The plaintiff sought $10,750.00 on a partial indemnity scale, while the defendant argued for a lower amount, citing procedural irregularities.

The court awarded the plaintiff costs in the all-inclusive amount of $9,000.00 on a partial indemnity basis, applying a small reduction for a jurisdictional mix-up and delegation issues.

The plaintiff tenant entered into an agreement of purchase and sale with the defendant landlord to buy the residential property she was leasing.

A dispute arose on closing regarding a $190,000 credit in a schedule to the agreement.

The transaction failed to close, and the plaintiff sued for specific performance, bringing a motion for leave to issue a certificate of pending litigation (CPL).

The court granted the motion, finding the plaintiff established a triable claim to an interest in land because the property was her home and therefore unique, and the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiff.