Hans Engell

The defendants brought a motion to adjourn a three-week trial scheduled to commence in one month, citing the plaintiffs' late production of documents and two expert reports.

The plaintiffs agreed to withdraw one expert report if the trial proceeded.

The court applied the factors from Ariston Realty and Igbinosun, finding that the defendants failed to provide sufficient evidence demonstrating why they could not proceed or how their defence would be significantly compromised.

The court emphasized the prejudice of delay to the plaintiffs in an eight-year-old action and dismissed the motion, without prejudice to the defendants seeking relief at trial regarding the late productions.

The plaintiff, a first-time home buyer, entered into an agreement of purchase and sale for a residential property after being told by the seller and the real estate agent that the home was over 2,000 square feet.

An appraisal later revealed the property was only 1,450 square feet.

The plaintiff sought rescission of the agreement and the return of his deposit.

The court found that the plaintiff reasonably relied on the negligent misrepresentations regarding the property's size and granted rescission, ordering the return of the $50,000 deposit.

Following a previous decision fixing costs on a partial-indemnity scale at $144,679.55 subject to a credit from Pierringer Agreements, the parties agreed that no credit amount should be applied.

The court ordered the defendants to pay the plaintiffs the full fixed amount of $144,679.55 for costs, including taxes and disbursements.

The plaintiff corporation sued its real estate agent and brokerage for breach of fiduciary duties arising from the sale of a commercial property.

The court found that the agent acted as an undisclosed dual agent, failed to provide required written disclosure under the Real Estate and Business Brokers Act Code of Ethics, failed to recommend a counter-offer, failed to disclose material information relevant to the transaction, and failed to strongly encourage independent legal advice before execution of the agreement.

The court held that these breaches deprived the seller of an opportunity to negotiate a better deal and constituted a breach of fiduciary obligations owed by a real estate agent to a client.

Although the plaintiff could not prove damages from an improvident sale, the agent had no contractual entitlement to a commission and, in any event, forfeited the commission due to the fiduciary breaches.

The defendants were ordered to return the commission plus prejudgment interest.