Christopher E. Reed

The appellant guaranteed a mortgage granted by his company.

After default, the respondents obtained judgment against the appellant on the guarantee.

The respondents subsequently postponed their mortgage to other mortgages held by related companies, and a foreclosure judgment was obtained.

The appellant applied to set aside the judgment against him, arguing the postponement materially altered his risk and terminated the guarantee.

The application judge dismissed the application.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the interpretation that the guarantee permitted the postponement without consent.

However, the Court admitted fresh evidence of the foreclosure judgment and remitted the issue of its effect on the enforceability of the judgment against the appellant to the application judge.

The vendor mistakenly accepted an agreement of purchase and sale for one of two adjacent properties without a condition tying the sale to the second property.

The purchaser attempted to waive the conditions for its benefit by faxing notice to the vendor's solicitor, rather than delivering it personally to the vendor as required by the agreement.

The vendor refused to close, relying on the strict notice requirements.

The purchaser sued for specific performance or damages and brought a motion for partial summary judgment, which was dismissed.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's decision, finding that the entire agreement clause precluded implied terms regarding notice, and that the vendor had not waived the requirement for personal delivery.