The applicants sought partition and sale of a jointly owned recreational property under the Partition Act.
The respondents opposed, arguing a co-ownership agreement governed the dispute and that the applicants acted in bad faith.
The court found the co-ownership agreement inoperable regarding fair market value and tax implications, and that the respondents were not acting reasonably or in good faith by arbitrarily determining the property's value.
The court exercised its discretion to grant the application for sale.
