Jeffrey Klein

The plaintiffs brought a motion to enforce a Mareva injunction, alleging the defendants were dissipating assets by selling automobiles through an intermediary.

The individual defendant appeared self-represented, stating he had retained counsel who was unavailable and had not explained the injunction terms to him.

The court declined to make a finding of contempt without responding materials but issued a final warning to the defendant, reiterated the terms of the injunction, and adjourned the motion peremptorily.

The applicants sought a declaration that an Agreement of Purchase and Sale (APS) for a property was null and void after the respondent purchasers failed to waive inspection and financing conditions by the deadline.

The respondents had proposed an amendment to the APS instead of waiving the conditions, which the applicants did not accept.

The respondents subsequently registered a Purchaser's Lien on the property.

The court held that the APS was null and void because the conditions were not explicitly waived or fulfilled in writing as required.

The court ordered the Purchaser's Lien discharged and the deposit returned to the respondents, finding no breach of the duty of good faith by the applicants.