The appellant appealed a summary judgment, arguing the motion judge erred in finding the respondent met her duty to mitigate following his breach of a contract of purchase and sale, and that the motion judge's reasons were inadequate.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the motion judge's reasons functionally adequate and her determination on mitigation reasonable.
The respondent was not obligated to grant further extensions or engage with the appellant's subsequent offers after his repeated failure to close the transaction.
