The appellant purchaser entered into an agreement to buy a townhouse but failed to close the transaction due to financial difficulties.
The vendor retained the $35,000 paid by the appellant as a forfeited deposit.
The appellant sued for the return of the funds, claiming relief from forfeiture, but the trial judge dismissed the action.
On appeal, the Divisional Court upheld the trial judge's finding that the appellant did not act reasonably and was therefore not entitled to relief from forfeiture.
The appeal was dismissed, with a dissenting opinion arguing that the payments were not explicitly defined as a deposit in the main agreement.
