The plaintiff purchased a commercial building from the defendant.
Prior to closing, the defendant provided a statutory declaration claiming uninterrupted use of an adjacent driveway without ever seeking permission.
The plaintiff subsequently sued the adjacent owner for a prescriptive easement but lost after discovering the defendant had previously sought permission via an unsigned 1987 agreement.
The plaintiff then sued the defendant for negligent misrepresentation to recover its legal costs from the unsuccessful easement action.
The Superior Court dismissed the action, finding that while the declaration contained false statements and the defendant owed a duty of care, the plaintiff did not detrimentally rely on the misrepresentations because it would have continued the easement litigation based on its counsel's advice regardless of the 1987 agreement.