The respondents failed to close a residential real estate transaction, and the appellants (vendors) sued for breach of contract.
At trial, the judge awarded damages based on an appraiser's assessment of fair market value rather than the actual resale price, finding the appellants failed to mitigate their damages.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, holding that the trial judge erred in law by bypassing the resale price as the presumptive fair market value and by relying on expert evidence that exceeded the appraiser's qualifications regarding marketing practices.
The Court awarded damages based on the difference between the original contract price and the resale price, plus certain expenses and legal fees.
