The applicant sought an interlocutory injunction preventing a neighbouring condominium developer from installing translucent panels on the west wall of a nearly completed building.
The applicant alleged the design breached a negative covenant allegedly agreed upon during planning approval discussions that the wall would contain no windows.
Applying the test from RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), the court held the applicant failed to establish a serious issue to be tried and provided no evidence of irreparable harm, particularly in the absence of expert evidence regarding impacts on future redevelopment or privacy.
The court also found the balance of convenience strongly favoured the developer because construction was substantially complete and the applicant had delayed unreasonably in bringing the motion.
The delay and resulting prejudice supported the equitable defence of laches.
