The applicants sought specific performance after the respondent developer terminated an agreement of purchase and sale for a new build condominium.
The parties initially agreed to a consent order restraining the sale of the property.
The respondent subsequently discovered the applicants had purchased another property shortly after entering the agreement and brought a motion to set aside the consent order and convert the application into an action.
The court found the non-disclosure relevant to the consent order and varied it to continue only pending a formal motion for a certificate of pending litigation.
The court also converted the application into an action, finding material facts in dispute and credibility issues regarding the uniqueness of the property and the parties' intentions that required a trial.
