The purchaser of a commercial property sought a declaration that the tenant was an over-holding occupant and sought vacant possession, arguing the commercial lease was not registered on title.
The tenant brought a cross-application for a declaration that the lease was valid and subsisting.
The court found that the purchaser had actual and deemed knowledge of the long-term commercial lease prior to closing, as they had visited the property multiple times, observed the business, and their real estate lawyer had received a copy of the lease from the vendor's lawyer before closing.
The purchaser's application was dismissed and the tenant's lease was declared valid and subsisting.
