N. Cameron Murkar

The appellants sought to overturn a motion judge's assessment of damages and obtain relief from forfeiture of a $400,000 deposit after failing to close a property purchase.

The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's decision, finding that the vendor was entitled to the full damages, and that the deposit was commercially reasonable, not disproportionate to actual damages, and there was no unconscionability or inequality of bargaining power to warrant relief from forfeiture.

The plaintiffs, including 1854329 Ontario Inc. and individual owners, brought a motion for summary judgment to claim a $400,000 deposit after the defendants, Angelo Cairo and Stouffville Glass Mirror and Aluminum 2012 Inc., failed to close a $7.25 million industrial property purchase.

The transaction failed due to the defendants' financing falling through, which they attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The court previously dismissed the individual plaintiffs' claims but found the corporate plaintiff liable for breach of contract.

This endorsement addresses the quantum of damages and whether to grant equitable relief from forfeiture of the full deposit.

The court calculated the corporate plaintiff's actual damages at $234,849.18, including reduced sale price, increased realtor fees, additional legal expenses, and lost time value of money.

The court found no unconscionability to relieve the defendants from forfeiture of the full $400,000 deposit, noting the thin evidence of COVID-19 causation, the defendants' decision to waive financing conditions despite pandemic awareness, and lack of evidence regarding post-breach negotiations.

Summary judgment was granted to 1854329 Ontario Inc. for the full deposit amount.

The plaintiffs brought a motion for partial summary judgment in an action arising from a failed $7.25 million commercial real estate transaction.

The defendants failed to close due to lack of financing but argued the agreement was invalid and the seller's closing documents were deficient.

The court found the matter appropriate for summary judgment on liability but declined to grant partial summary judgment for the deposit, as the defendants' request for relief from forfeiture was intertwined with the overall damages claim.

The court granted summary judgment on liability in favour of the corporate plaintiff, finding the defendants breached the valid agreement.

The individual plaintiffs' claims were dismissed for lack of standing as they were not parties to the contract.