The appellant entered into an agreement of purchase and sale for a residential unit in a condominium project and paid a $500,000 deposit, mostly directly to the developer.
The developer was subsequently placed into receivership by the first mortgagee.
The receiver disclaimed the appellant's agreement of purchase and sale.
The appellant sought an order requiring the receiver to complete the sale, arguing he had an equitable interest in the property.
The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's dismissal, finding that the agreement explicitly subordinated the purchaser's interest to any mortgages and that the appellant's equitable claims could not defeat the mortgagee's prior secured legal interest.