The applicant purchaser sought the return of a $3.25 million deposit after refusing to close a $70 million commercial real estate transaction, alleging the respondent vendor failed to satisfy conditions regarding a Walmart estoppel certificate and a Dollarama lease extension.
The vendor argued the purchaser used minor technicalities to avoid closing due to the economic uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The court found that the vendor made commercially reasonable efforts to satisfy the conditions and that the purchaser failed to act reasonably and in good faith by refusing to accept the documents or negotiate.
The court concluded the purchaser repudiated the transaction and the vendor was entitled to retain the deposit.
