The appellant appealed a trial decision ordering specific performance of an oral agreement to sell 100,000 shares of a private company to the respondent.
The appellant argued that no binding agreement was reached, that third-party approval was a condition precedent, and that specific performance was an inappropriate remedy.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's conclusion that an objective reasonable bystander would find the parties intended to contract based on securities industry custom.
The Court also upheld the specific performance order, noting the shares were unique and damages would be inadequate.