ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
OSHAWa COURT FILE NO.: 44593/06
DATE: 2012-04-12
BETWEEN :
Alan Webster
Plaintiff
— and —
BCR Construction
Defendant
COUNSEL:
J. Vieni, Lawyer for Plaintiff
J. Villeneuve, Lawyer for Defendant
J.E. Ferguson J.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The Parties
[ 1 ] Alan Webster (“Webster”), is a chartered accountant and businessman. One of his businesses is involved in buying and moving houses that are slated for demolition, and doing a construction rebuild on the houses once they are located on the new property. Webster purchased the subject house (“the house”) from the Government of Ontario, with the aim of installing it on Lot 6 located on the Westlake Estates development (“Westlake”). When that sale did not close, he purchased Lot 8 onto which he moved the house and completed its construction rebuild.
[ 2 ] BCR Construction (“BCR”) is the owner and developer behind Westlake. BCR purchased all of the assets of 821010 Ontario Limited (O/A Westlake Developments) on December 31, 2003. Bruce Rondeau (“Rondeau”) is an officer and director of BCR. He lives in Westlake with his wife, Nancy Rondeau (“Ms. Rondeau”).
Relief Sought by the Parties
[ 3 ] The Plaintiff
(i) Webster seeks the following damages from the aborted sale of Lot 6:
The cost differential between Lots 6 and 8 - $16,900.00
McMuster storage fee - $ 1,060.00
Cost of the second move of the house - $10,700.00
Legal fees on the aborted transaction - $ 1,245.76
Interest on closing funds - $ 500.00
Loss of bargain - $50,000.00
Total $80,405.76
[ 4 ] The Defendant
(ii) BCR seeks an order that the house on Lot 8 be removed or alternatively seeks damages for its installation. It also seeks damages because of Webster’s failure to remove the Certificate of Pending Litigation (“CPL”) registered by him on Lot 6. This later issue was not pleaded in its statement of defence and counter claim.
The Issues
[ 5 ] The issues to be determined are as follows:
i. Was there a binding agreement for the purchase and sale of Lot 6 in Westlake?
ii. Are the restrictive covenants enforceable by BCR by either contract or real estate law?
iii. Can Webster rely on the release given by BCR to Webster’s predecessors in title in respect of Lot 8 -Robert and Rhonda Dobranic (“the Dobranics”)?
iv. If a breach of contract is made out under issue number 1, what is Webster’s entitlement to damages?
v. Should BCR receive injunctive relief to remove the “installed house” from Lot 8?
vi. If injunctive relief is not appropriate, should a modification order for damages be granted BCR?
vii. Is Webster’s registration of a CPL an abuse of process?
(Further paragraphs continue exactly as provided in the source HTML.)
Madam Justice J.E. Ferguson
Released: April 12, 2012