The moving party, assignee of the developer, sought summary judgment to enforce three debt instruments against the respondent condominium corporation.
The condominium corporation argued the instruments were oppressive due to inadequate disclosure to purchasers.
The court found the disclosure regarding the service unit mortgage and parking unit mortgage was confusing and insufficient, breaching the reasonable expectations of the purchasers.
The court reduced the principal amounts of both mortgages to reflect fair value and reasonable expectations.
The court also found a promissory note for land transfer tax was void for lack of a borrowing by-law and oppressive as it circumvented the developer's statutory obligation for first-year budget deficits.
The court awarded the condominium corporation amounts for common expense arrears, a first-year budget deficit, and reserve fund payments, and declined to appoint a receiver.
