Real Estate Fall 2014 - Rosenblatt (Long Summary)

7/24/2019 Real Estate Fall 2014 - Rosenblatt (Long Summary)

1/95

P a g e | 1

Terms.......................................................................................... 22Real Estate Agents: Standards of Conduct..................................23

Selkirk v. J. A. Willoughby & Sons Ltd. (1959), S.C.. !5.........................23"#e$n City e$lty Li%ited v. A & 'oldings Ltd. (19!) CCA * S#o+e o duty....................................................................................................... 23_Toc405940081$so v. -ionigi (199), 1/ ".. (d) 50 ("nt. C.A.) du$l $gen#y.........23

_Toc405940083'odgkinson v. Si%%s (1992) SCC * 3- ound.........................244no#h st$te v. Jon 6i#ken Ltd. (1991) ("nt. C.A.) * SA does not o7e $ de$ult 3- to8, though #$nnot de#eive%isle$d, or 7ithhold %$teri$l ino $bout o:er sub%itted............................................................................................................................ 24Century /1 e$l e$lty ;n#. v. C$%+bell, (/01/) * A -;........................25

Agent as Purchaser.....................................................................25

s. 32 Real Estate and Business Brokers Act, 2002 regulations where RE is apurchaser...........................................................................................25Reedies! Restitutionar" #aages #isgorgeent o$ %ro&ts, 'opensator"#aages, Reedial '( $or )R *$or +# Soulos, %uniti-e #aages....25

C$l$ndr$ v. .A. Cle$ners (1990), ! ".. (/d) 22*As $ailure to disclose intent topurchase............................................................................................................ 25

Lee v. Cho7 (1990)*As $ailure to disclose intent to purchase.....................25Soulos v. 4orkont) *dual agenc", A lia/le, $ailed to ake $ull 1 $rank disclosure........................................................................................................................... 2"s#$r ?nited =rou+ ;n#. v. Chee, /01/ "@SC (like 'odgkinson, +unitive d$%$ges)........................................................................................................................... 2

Listing Agreement and Conditions..............................................27

s. 32 Real Estate and Business Brokers Act, 2002.............................2onl" allows RE agents a" sue or /ring an action to reco-er coission 2oore v. or$d *onl" RE agents are statutoril" entitled to coission pa"ents 2etro+olit$n rust Co. v. L$tv$l$ et $l (19!9) *clients not lia/le to pa" coission a$ter%on oulot nter+rises Ltd. v. 4ots#horek (190) BC * *clients lia/le $or post %coission....................................................................................................... 2Statute of Frauds -, agreements related to RE must be in writing , so i$ its not inwriting, its not en$orcea/le unless there are eleents o$ part per$orance......2


2/95

P a g e | 2

3irst City e$lty Ltd. v. 'er%$ns (/002) *cond precedent $or As entitleent tocoission=idd$ v. $lik L$7 "#e. D/00>E "@SC......................................................2.L. Will$ert e$lty Ltd. v. 3ody,/01 "@SC * lia/le $or coission, RE( did notconclude

e!osits...................................................................................... 2"

s. 666 'rt o$ 7ustice Act! 'rt right to grant relie$ against penalties 1 $or$eitures.

...........................................................................................................28-e6$l%$ v. unny%ede (1950) "@CA 6? sent +$y%ent did not s+e#iy i de+ositor 66.................................................................................................................. 28Cr$ig v. oh$7k et$l Ltd. (19!>) " *%) still $or$eits deposit i$ sells to %2 9 higherprice6orto v. -i-o%i), 50 .6.. (/d) 11............................................28Cu%berl$nd e$lty =rou+ Ltd. v. .L.. 'oldings Lid. (192), (Alt$ C.A))( &").................................................................................................................. 28;yer v. 6le$s$nt -evelo+%ents ;n#., D/00>E................................................28.= 6ree#o (6$#iF# Co$st) Ltd. v. ond Street -evelo+%ents 199 d$%$ges orr$ud %isre+..................................................................................................... 2:

Conditional Agreements..............................................................2#urney v. Ghilk$, D1959E S.C.. 5! 6? #ould not 7$ive C" ..................2:"Heilly v. $rketers -iversiFed ;n#., D19>9E S.C. * 6? #ould not 7$ive C6 7oright o 7$iver.................................................................................................2:$rnett v. '$rrison, D19!>E / S.C.. 51 121 * $r%s urney, no #o%+elling re$sonnot to................................................................................................................. 2:

_Toc405940190

S$%PLE C&'$T$&'S...................................................................2#e$u#h$%+ v e$u#h$%+..............................................................................2:

atters Relating (o law"ers...............................................................2:

=$y7ood'$ll -evelo+%ents Ltd. v. Wilkes (19!/) ti%e is o the essen#e 2:#;lroy v. St$nton (1999)

_Toc405940200'$rl$nd v. 3$n#s$li (1992), /1 ".. (d) !9 * r$udulent %isre+ &7$iver o #ond................................................................................................. 301!5>! "nt$rio Ltd. v. @ov$te# Constru#tion Ltd. (1999) estoppel 1 tie liits oncond....................................................................................................................36-e%eri v 47$n & 47$n Ltd. D/00E#4ee v. onte%$r$no, (/00)....................................................................36


3/95

P a g e | 3

&(ligation to Satisf) Conditions..................................................3*

%lanning Act.......................................................................................36Alder#rest -e+ts. Ltd. v. 'unter (19!0) "@ CA *good $ith duty in +eror%ing C6........................................................................................................................... 32-yn$%i# r$ns+ort Ltd. v. ".4. -et$iling Ltd., D19!E / S.C.. * scope of good faithduty................................................................................................................... 32 nter+rises Ltd. v. C$%+e$u Cor+or$tion (190) CSC, le$d #$se, good $ithduty testv$ns v. 4ouy$s (19) @SCA, le$d #$se, oten #ited in "@ * good $ith duty reIFn$n#ing #ond................................................................................................. 32!!95 "nt$rio Ltd. v. sse (199) * 8 dis#h$rged =3 duty, reus$l to %$ke $++not %ere s+e#ul$tion, unlike Alder#rest, reus$l b$sed on good $uth. .33$st7$lsh 'o%es Ltd. v. An$t$l -evelo+%ents Ltd. (1990 ) +rob$bility o $++rov$lin $7$rding d$%$ges #onsidered, like nter+rises, %ere +rob$bility 7$s lo7er........................................................................................................................... 33

iscretionar) Conditions Precedent............................................33

ect to the ?satis$action, the

discretion or the opinion o$ a part" to the agreeent or o$ a third part" 33$rsh$ll v. ern$rd 6l$#e Cor+. (/00/),......................................................33

_Toc40594025810>1590 "nt$rio Li%ited v. "nt$rio Jo#key Club (1995), /1 ".. * good$ith issue on SJ...............................................................................................34

Acting on +oth Sides , $nde!endent Legal Ad-ice.......................3

%rinciple! @/ligation to disclose to clients when acting on /oth sides o$ atransaction, onus on to discharge /urden o$ proo$ that o/ligation was $ul&lle...........................................................................................................34

RE agent! $ conCict o$ interest, agent cannot act on /oth sides.......................34Lawyer: can act $or /oth sides, $or the realit" o$ the /usiness world and o$ten econoics

dictate this course o$ conduct su/>ect to copliance with LSUC.......................34 Consent in writing *and noti$" parties......................................................34

Element of disclosure i$ has a histor" or special relationship with the other client34

!on-con"dentiality *6i$ retained, *2dut" to disclose all aterial $acts; dut" not tokeep an"thing con&dential $ro one side to the other ;*3 i$ $uture conCict o$ interest arises, a" not /e a/le to continue acting $or either.................................................34

%rinciple o$ A ReDuireent in #ual Agenc" /a-e) 0 1oolle).......34Lawyer must re#uire that a party obtain $L% when acting on both sides if there isan improper con&ict of interest that e'ists or subse#uently arises:.....34*6 *a $ s duties to another client, a $orer client, or a (% */create a substantial of

material and ad(erse e)ect on the representation of a client ................34*2 Risk o$ using con&dential in$oration o/tained $ro client to herdetrientdisad-antage.....................................................................................34*3 $ an iproper /ene&t or ad-antage as a result o$


4/95

P a g e | 4

S%it v. AlFeld 3$r%s Ltd. (19/) (.C.S.C.) * conCict o$ interest arises in RE(. heldlia/le................................................................................................................... 35L, should ha(e instructed him to see* $L% and caution about relying on oralpromise............................................................................................................. 354or< v. St. 6ierre (19!), >1 ".. (/d) >09 ("nt. CA.) L in Koint tr$ns$#t not $s L........................................................................................................................... 35

Fon Est +actu /%ar-coreDuires that the contractor or testator who now seeksto set aside the docuent esta/lish that *6she had intended to sign a

docuent o$ a $undaentall" diGerent nature. *2 'o-er cases o$ undueinCuence , relationship o$ con&dence and pressures contractor or testator to actin a certain anner EHception! FE+ de$ence does not appl" i$ the donors lack o$knowledge a/out the circustances arises $ro laIiness or carelessness as/etween two innocent parties who suGer $ro the $raud o$ a third /ut one o$ theinnocent parties is negligent..............................................................35

ulut v. C$rter, /012 "@CA 2/2no @3 deen#e, #$reless did not re$d , or $sk s........................................................................................................................... 35$rvo Color ese$r#h Ltd. v. '$rris (19/)FE+ de$ence $ails i$ part" is careless 1sophisticated...................................................................................................... 3Shute v. 6re%ier rust (1992)ML held li$ble or negligen#e.....................3$rtin v. =old$rb (199!) o/ligation to disclose to other part" i$ 6 part" has criinalrecord

'ircustances where A is reDuired *Smit, higher onus $or unsophisticatedparties...............................................................................................3*6 )n$air ad-antage /or4..............................................................3*2 transact clearl" ad-erse to /orrower /or4................................3*3 undue inCuence..........................................................................3*4 ignorance o$ circustance..........................................................3/5 copleHit" o$ transact /a-e)...................................................3

$#k$y v. $nk o @ov$ S#oti$ (1992), /0 "...........................................3

Webb v. o%linson. D/00>E ("nt. S.C.) L$7yer not li$ble, he +rovided ;LA 3oy$l $nk o C$n$d$ v //20092 "nt$rio ;n#, /01 "@SC * ;LA & gu$r$ntors 3Ratio: A legal deterination cannot /e ade E............................................................3:St$n#iu v. St$n#iu (/002) v$lid #onvey$n#e o ee si%+le by git does not #re$tei%+lied lie interest........................................................................................ 3:


5/95

P a g e | 5

'$rding v. eLeod (/002), "@ *other con-e"s ppt" o$ eHisting trust $or son to daughter........................................................................................................................... 3:-$ni#ki v. -$ni#ki (1995), ".J. 995............................................................3:(alid gift to son+ Law does not enforce moral laws, honour thy father and thymother...............................................................................................................3:Cre+e$u v. Cre+e$u (/01/) "@SC 21 do7n +$y%ent or %ortg$ge ro% %u% toson 7$s lo$n....................................................................................................40

_Toc4059403486re%ier rust v. e$ton (1990), 1".. *de$ %ute %u% inde%nied by L$g$inst %......................................................................................................406e#ore v 6e#ore /00!.....................................................................................40

Ca-eat Em!tor octrine /A(sence of 1arrant) &(ligation to isclose8

Ris6 of 9ualit) of condition lies u!on P a(sent fraud or mista6e. 0 has

no dut) to disclose !atent /!ercei-a(le defects readil) a!!arent u!onins!ection...................................................................................8

EHception/%cgrath endor owes a dut" to %) to disclose eHistence o$

*6latent de$ects that the *2 knows render the sale propert", *3dangerous,likel" to /e dangerous, or uninha/ita/le. *4@nus on claiant to esta/lish on aB@%, *5 # can use 'E to re/ut pria $acie case...............................40

#octrine o$ erger terinates s responsi/ilities........................46

Representations and proises contained in A%< erge on closing a/senteHpress ters to the contrar", or unless warrantiesrepresentations46

E'clusionary, Limitation of Liability, E'emption, Clause para ./.........46Fo representation, warrant" or collateral conditions other than as eHpressed herein 46

iit, Duali$" or eHclude s lia/ilit" $or warranties, representations outside of %0S,

attached schedules or S0$S...........................................................................46S0$S Seller1s 0roperty $nformation Statement/........................................46oluntar" disclosure stateents a/out sale propert"; possi/le /asis $or clais $or rescission$or tort o$ deceit or negligent isrepresentation...............................................46#=r$th v. $#Le$n et $l (19!9) "@CA.......................................................46 had no dut" to disclose, did not know wall su/>ect to landslide......................46

_Toc405940370=ron$u v. S#hi$%+ ;nvest%ents Ltd. (19!2) $n B...........46'E does not appl" i$ concealed patent de$, $raudulent isrep........................46-$nkovi# v. St. St$nisl$us St. C$si%irNs 6$rish (19>), *@F lia/le, inopera/le$urnace............................................................................................................... 46$r$thon e$lty v. =insberg (19/) "@CASevid$l v. Cho+r$ (19!) >2 " * disclose latent de$ects in -icinit" o$ sale ppt" 46=oldstein v. -$vison (1992) does not ollo7 $r$thon............................42onyNs ro$dloo% & 3loor Covering Li%ited v. @.C..C$n$d$ ;n#.(199>),42Surn%$#h v. Allen, D/00E .C.S.C. * no dut" to disclose near/" nude /each42


6/95

P a g e | 6

Antoris$ ;nvest%ents (/00>) OAs is 7here isO . eHcludes $ro tort lia/ilit"424ings+$n v. r$ntord (City) (/011), "@SC * unclear of grou! claim to sale !!t) a latentdefecti##hio v. ot$ (/011) a" /e lia/le on /asis o$ isreps in uana grow=op o$ppt".................................................................................................................... 441!2!! "nt$rio ;n#. v. 4W L$bour Asso#i$tion in#., /012 "@CA C h$unted++ty................................................................................................................... 44

'ondoinius and Representations..................................................446eel Condo%iniu% Cor+. @o. 505 v. C$% 8$lley 'o%es Ltd., (/001) no pre K good$aith dut"............................................................................................................44

Re!resentations; 1arranties E


7/95

P a g e | 7

2 # or Agent akes a $alse representation / knowledge o$, or recklessness as to, its$alsit" 3/7 or % intended to decei(e 0L with representation4/+alse representation issu/>ecti-el" aterial 8/ +alse rep induced % to act; ./ % suGered daages45

Liability = ECdoes not shield lia/ilit", 9s can be (icariously liable for fraudulentmisrep of %gents *Sem6ule) Scholl...............................................................45

E#uitable Remedy of Rescission %F;ER closing , U!LESS *nowledge beforeclose, then right to rescission is wai(ed, but claimant can sue for damages(urro7sP Cubukgil)........................................................................................45

claiant ust pro-e representation was............................................................45 ome 1arranties Plan Act................................................................4


8/95

P a g e | 8

(3r$ser)$F not cond, is it a warranty: 2/ Duestion o$ $act;/ #oes the contractdisclose a coon intention o$ erger re warrant"L e'press or implied 3/(he K la/el$or warrant" is a re/utta/le presuption...........................................................4

E)ect of C : does not shield $ro lia/ilit", ter collateral to the agreeent . 4

A+(ER close=Remedy of 7amages, U!LESS


9/95

P a g e | 9

91s liability - fraud misrep, rescission granted= O ilk Duota was a -ital $actor indeterining econoic -ia/ilit" o$ $ar, 25P reduction was a aterial $actor = there was atleast recklessness that aounted to $raudulent issrep on part o$ that induced % to enter Kand % relied on the issrep *although one part was true this was a hal$ truth..48REAs liability, negligent misrep= RE agent ade negligent isrep; owed % a dut" o$ care$ro holding sel$ out as eHpert, % relied on isrepresented stateent and % suGered a loss$ro such reliance.............................................................................................. 48'$y7$rd v. elli#k (19/), "@......................................................................486$t$v v. 'ut#hings (199) * agents lia/le $or isrep; sued % $or /reach and the" settled, Jris/"..............................................................................................................48RuleA listing agent owes no +# (o the purchaser (C$ter+rill$r), /ut does not ha-e the rightto protect s interests $raudulentl"; A selling agent has a dut" to protect the interests o$ the%) client;............................................................................................................ 487ecision:isting agent ade $raudulent isrep *isled % as to character o$ the propert" ;o"ent o$ li$e i$ a/le to esta/lish ental in>ur"was $oreseea/le result o$ B@M............................................................................4:Beld lia/le $or $raud isrep $or /reach o$ eHpress K warrant". ack o$ personal knowledgenot aterial to &nding o$ lia/ilit"........................................................................4:7amages:the cost o$ reo-ing the insulation 1 additional 20P /c o$ stiga in-ol-ed withthe insulation and soe daages $or eotional turoil....................................4:=l$sner v. oy$l Le6$ge e$l st$te Servi#es Ltd. (199)......................4:%) entitled to rescission $or $raud isrep, warrant"; uniteral aendent to )+ warrant"........................................................................................................................... 4:

Rulen odern coercial relations, where an iportant unilateral aendent is /eingade it is not unreasona/le to ensure that knowledge o$ such aendent coes to theother side == part" ust /e gi-en a real opportunit" to appreciate the change ; #ut" $ro to% can arise when K concluded under unilateral istake.....................................50Beld:%) entitled to rescission $or $raud isrep. knew $act was aterial /c lang o$ clausewas changed, instructed agent not to ention it unless speci&call" ask. %) re$used to closeiediatel" a$ter changes raised@lsJl..............................................................50John Levy 'oldings ;n#. v. C$%eron & Johnson Li%ited (199) * not lia/le $or $raudisrep................................................................................................................. 50Ratio! anguage within a Kual stateent, ?to best of my *nowledge and beliefAdid notwarrant a/solute truth o$ the stateent. t was reasona/le, $air 1 truth$ul........50


10/95

P a g e | 10

BEL7: was not lia/le $or $raud isrep $or /reach o$ warrant";, no daages $or %). 'lausedid not ipose on to per$or tests to con&r the presence o$ containation50

MARRAF(Q @R '@F#(@FL...............................................................50Jori$n 6ro+erties Ltd. v. Gellenr$th (192) ("nt. C.A.).............................50BEL7:Fo daages /ecause %) elected not to close, so no /reach o$ warrant" here 50Reasoning:ere, sale ppt" could still /e used as a tripleH -s. &-e=pleH would, F@( ha-edepri-ed the plaintiG o$ su/stantiall" the whole /ene&t which the parties intended it shouldo/tain, rent$l +ro+ertyunder K 7$SSE!;:*6 diGerence in kind 1 degree /tw

tripleH&-epleH in ters o$ re-enue earning potential 1 capital -alue *warrant", ore like costo$ heating o$ ppt". *2 $ %) would ha-e had action $or E9) "@ * 8 li$ble or S. 6 entitled to res#ission....56Beld:% entitled to rescission. istake was so su/stantial that it $undaentall" changed the

propert" that was /argained $or. could ha-e searched title, /ut /oth parties were istaken ,dept o$ land 84 not 60......................................................................................564i$ni v. Abdull$h (199) * 6? entitled to res#ission or S......................56Beld:% entitled to rescission $or E


11/95

P a g e | 11

Beld:'rt did not accept %)s e-idence as to ha-ing one" to close *re-iewedcorrespondence, rapid arket decline..............................................................52

EU')%A(@RQ 'A)S EC+...........................................................................52*ulnera/le parties = 40 "r old illiterate iigrant ca/ dri-er, 5: "ear old co//ler 52Ratio: 2/RE agent *or has a dut" to act with care and skill in re-iewing A%< ters,including dut" , to speci&call" draw to the clients attention an" pro-isions in the agreeentthat are contrar" to clients interest. /'lient does not ha-e an o/ligation to readinstruent where there is reliance on a &duciar" to do so.................................52%nalysis:E-idence was selling agent speci"cally failedto eHplain that inspection clausehas /een $undaentall" altered. Agent should ha-e eHplained that the aendent adewas that he would not /e a/le to get out o$ the deal unless there was structural pro/le............................................................................................................................ 521012/9 "nt$rio ;n#. v. 3e$ ;nvest%ents Ltd. (1999) court can o-erride K choice o$

reed"............................................................................................................... 52B: 0U entitled to damages for tort of deceit for breach of warranty in lieu ofrescission, statements were so rec*less.....................................................53Ratio! %arties to K a" liit a reed" /" eHpress ters in K to rescission $or /reach o$warrant", /ut courts a" choose not en$orce such a Kual pro- where innocent part" hasesta/lished clai $or tort o$ deceit.....................................................................53S7$v


12/95

P a g e | 12

3r$ser Je7ellers v. -o%inion le#tri# 6rote#tion (199!) E' en$orced against >eweller"store................................................................................................................... 54Ratio:A sophisticated part" is not entitled to the" did not assent to an E' i$ lang o$ pro- isclear una/iguous unless pressuredrushed into signing K..............................54Beld! E' clause in agreeent w #oinion Electric en$orced. %) cannot reco-er daages ineHcess o$ liited lia/ilit" cause..........................................................................54%nalysis! n K, E' was highlighted in bold letterson the K, its lang was clear anduna/igious, nothing was done to islead the reader, % was not rushedpressured intosigning K. ; $act that % is a sall /usiness is not enough to warrant court inter-ention 54er#on Contr$#tors Ltd. v. C (inister o r$ns+ort$tion &'igh7$ys (/010),(S.C.C.).............................................................................................................. 54Ratio'ts ha-e no discretion to in-alidate a -alid Kual eHclusion unless, *i unconsciona/le/ased on the circustances o$ the case, 6Rii esta/lishing, o-erriding paraount pu/licpolic" consideration sucient to trup +@K and de$eat otherwise K rights o$ parties. 54Rule of interpretation! $ a/iguit" o$ E' cannot /e resol-ed using construction rule,contra pre$erente applies, and it is interpreted against part" who /ene&ts $ro it. 54

SC &(ligations............................................................................5@

Rule 2 o$ the Rules o$ %ro$essional 'onduct = Relationship to 'lients *Relates toortgages.........................................................................................5

2.06 = 'opetence............................................................................................. 52.02 = Vualit" o$


13/95

P a g e | 13

d crts task is correcti-e *to restore /argain, not speculati-e;.....................5e %uniti-e daages only awarded if 2/copensator" daages are insucient, and*2 denunciation is necessar"............................................................................. 5Beld! # %) lia/le $or daages. *e instructed his not to raise istake 'ourt orderedrecti&cation and copensator", not puniti-e daages. 'orporate -eil was pierced to hold theprincipals o$ the % personall" lia/le....................................................................5

#ut" when retained a$ter A%< is signed.............................................5Wong v. 20!/! "nt$rio Ltd. (1999) * not lia/le $or closing transact with shell co.

........................................................................................................................... 5BERE! was not negligent in not attepting to renegotiate securit"; his retainer was to closethe deal.............................................................................................................. 5Ratio Retainer o$ beforeA%< is signed triggers o/ligation to negotiate securit" $orwarrant";............................................................................................................5!o such dutyarises i$ retained a$ter A%< is signed. (he instruction is to conclude transaction........................................................................................................................... 5nns v. 6$nKu (19!) (.C.S.C.)* lia/le $or not eHplaining de&ciencies o$ signed A%)* lia/le $or negligence on liited retainer 5:Ratio!................................................................................................................. 5:

has a dut" to ensure R is docuented in writing, and.............................5:that that client understands the risks o$ a R -s. a t"pical retainer....................5:

Mhen is acting on purchase o$ an apartent /uilding, ,


14/95

P a g e | 14

Beld: lia/le $or negligence. e did not re/ut pria $acie negligence. R was notdocumented at all by memo, nor in reporting letter......................................5:Reasoning. (he $act that A%< was signed and client had alread" wai-ed conditions does not

>usti$" his conduct............................................................................................... 5:Q$%$d$ v. o#k (199!) dut" to -eri$" identit" o$ clients...............................5:Ratiourisdiction to relie-e a istake in $raudcircustances ating to$raudisrep. $F..................................................................................................02/6 part" knowing o$ the others istake as to the ters o$ an oGer reain silent and, /concludes a K under the istaken ters FM< that part" ought to recogniIe istake 0"ut$ou$is Synergest ;n#. v. 4een$n (/011)................................................0no good $aith dut" in pre=K /argaining process, $ollows *Qork Condo%iniu%0


15/95

P a g e | 15

Ratio! #ut" that indi-idual law"ers owe to one another is unclear.An would eHpect theother to act in $air and honest dealing; or that law"er would disclose collect=/ack clause, /uts law"er had no o/ligation to do so. Beld: nor had dut" to disclose clause clause. %s lia/le $or negligence, should ha-e reDuisitioned.................................................0eier v. ose (/01/), *ustent o$ $ees upon con-e"ance like ppt" taH andutilities pa"a/le /" Bu"er a$ter closing da"........................................................2

;ime is of the Essence Clause H o/ligation to per$or condition within Ks deadlinessu/>ect to negotiations /etween 1 %...............................................................2


16/95

P a g e | 16

;ender Clause 2parties ust /e read", willing and a/le to per$or to tender 2

EC Clause .= eHcludes s lia/ilit" $or representations outside o$ A%< package likeschedule or


17/95

P a g e | 17

6hinny v. $#$ul$v (/00!) (LHs oblig$tion in #$se o e$se%ents Ru$liy your$dvi#e).............................................................................................................. 3Ratio:Vuali$" "our ad-ice to 'lient. ere, %) law"er told his client that he did not ha-e toclose, /ut was wrong in end /ecause >udge said reDuisition $or easeent was not -alid 3Beld:Foinal daages awarded to /c daages were not itigate. %) could ha-e /eenlia/le $or treendous daages.......................................................................... 34ing Lots oronto Ltd. v. %%ons, /012 "@CA /15 *title insurance, o"ent o$ ppt" *a how long has it /een there,*/ easil" reo-a/leL.........................................................................4

4oo v. edhill (199).......................................................................................4Beld:%) /ound to transaction /c reDuisition $or encroachent was not -alid. Buildingencroached $ro 6.5 to 3 inches, had /een there $or so long, so inor, that %) could ha-egained possessor" title through A%, there$ore the encroachent did not eHpose %) tolitigation..............................................................................................................4

Boning 1or6 &rders /not a matter of con-e)ance..................@

ust /e ade in accordance with s 8 deadlines, not a atter o$ con-e"ance...........................................................................................................4

4elly v. Se%+le (/010),*distinguished $ro Koo, uniDue ppt", shed was an o-erall selling$eature............................................................................................................... 4Beld:ReDuisition that shed did not copl" with Ioning was -alid. %) 2 was entitled torescind................................................................................................................ 4Reasoning: 'ottage is not a con-entional ppt". ere, the $act that storage shed had to /erelocated in a diG area entitles % to repudiate transact, /c %)< are /u"ing $or their $ail",incl children. @ne o$ the ain uses $or propert" is watersports. ake=side location o$ thestorage shed was a a positi-e selling $eature o$ the o-erall propert". *ppt" listing re$erred toit....................................................................................................................... 4

Co-enant....................................................................................@odd v. '$sloer (19) "............................................................................4

Ratio % cannot reDuisition a restricti-e co-enant where clause : o$ the A%< has not /eenstruck out = and a has no dut" to disclose such a restricti-e co-enant...........4

Right of 1a) /not root of title; s " deadline................................@linkhorn v. Ains7orth (19>) ("nt. C.A.)...................................................4BEL7:aw"er $or %) did not ake reDuisition on tie although would ha-e /een -alid i$ade in tie, /ut %) was ou t o$ tie, so not a -alid reDuisition and thus no rescission; rheld lia/le $or $ailing to ake reDuisition on tie RULE: % Re#uisition must be madewithin timeframe stipulated does not go to root of title.......................4


18/95

P a g e | 18

F:%) consults on each oGer in search $or res ppt".. Retained a$ter oGer accepted. ne-erentioned right o$ wa" t o$ when %) signed closing docs. searched title and $ound right o$wa" .................................................................................................................... 4Beld! negligent $or $ailing to e-er call %)s attention to registered right o$ wa", reportingletter................................................................................................................... 4Ratio! ect to conds! *6 gi-e noticeto other part" *2 REA


19/95

P a g e | 19

o7send unre$son$ble A rescheduled closing date is not reasona/le i$ reset to a$ter'o. @$ Ad>ustent hearing date; cant be 8 years into the future..........

Lu#ky -og 6$rtywishing to rel" on tie is o$ the essence to /e entitled to withdraw$ro transact must act in good faith. $ he does not $ul&ll good $aith dut", then part" isprecluded $ro rel"ing on (@E pro-....................................................................

!6;E: Escrow! = where docuent*s or one" is gi-en to a 3% to /e held in trust until

certain ters and conditions are satis&ed, at which tie the third part" is to hand o-er thedocuent or propert" to the proisee...............................................................

!6;E: closing times:i$ no hour o$ closing on close date is speci&ed, closing date is

open until idnight o$ $ollowing da"...................................................................

%rinciple Jood +aith............................................................................ Le esurier v. Andrus "@CAP4ingEach part" owes a good $aith dut" to the other totr" to resol-e title pro/les and to per$or K. (o deterine whether good $aith dut"discharged, o/>ecti-e standard used to e-aluate erits o$ an" coplaint /" % %!7iposes ahigh not per$ stand o$ per$orance on .@nce A%< is signed, the courts polic" is to $a-ourthe en$orceent o$ honest /argains...................................................................5reaches cannot rely on ;6E......................................................................!ot a breach can rely on ;6E.....................................................................

=3 4o:%$nvPLu#ky -og%) is considered to /reach dut" to act in good $aith where he

intentionall" dela"s notice o$ reDuisition until the closing date, and has ad-anced knowledgeo$ o/>ection regarding a atter..........................................................................

=3 Cit$tion e$lty ;n# is in /reach o$ good $aith where he acts in dishonest", andwould /e precluded $ro rel"ing (@E pro-.........................................................

(Leung Reliance on a inor issue to a-oid transact . *8$ndervliet * 6? li$ble or 15>4, interests $nd #osts $ %) ; was wrong .a/out issue upon which he is rel"ing to a-oidtransact, still lia/le %) is sued $or B@K /" , takes pos that reDuisition on consent o$unicipalit" $or sale o$ residential ppt", goes to R@@( o$ ((E.........................

C$rreno, $rtens st$te%) not entitled to rel" on (@E pro- to terinate transaction on/asis o$ reDuisition to open /uilding perit. Commitment to title insurance suKcient

J$#ksonP?nion $gle 0U failed to pay deposit within time speci"ed, days after

due.(ie is o$ the essence. $ transaction is not copleted as scheduled, then part" rel"ingon tie is o$ the essence pro-ision is entitled to a-oid transaction, unless acting in /ad $aith.ere not in good $aith, /ut not OBA#W!................................................................

(Leung eHtends to cases in-ol-ing inor oissions or de$ects. $ error is so inor thatit could /e corrected win a da", then there is an o/ligation to disclose FM< inor de$ect.

Remed) , amages or SP...........................................................@7

%rinciple! A claiant is entitled to ecti-e=su/>ecti-e deterination /Southcott.*3@therwise, claiant is onl"entitled to daages, *2 triggers a dut" to itigate, *4 assessent o$ arket-alue at date /" what is $air in the circustances o$ each case. /Semelhago...........................................................................................................'erti&cate o$ %ending itigation.........................................................

(o /e entitled to a certi&cate o$ pending litigation, %) ust esta/lish that saleppt" is uniDueX on a otion. %) seeks this when he thinks is in B@K, and doesnot want to sell land.......................................................................


20/95

P a g e | 20

-$te $nd e$sure o -$%$ges.....................................................................

Southcott $ daages assessed at date o$ trial, claiant ust ha-e itigated.

@therwise, assessed at date o$ /reach.............................................. $ retains propert" to speculate on arket, daages will /e assessed at date o$ closing

#ut" to itigate nnocent part" has a dut" to itigate losses resulting $ro B@K........................................................................................................... South#ott%) cannot eHcuse dut" to itigate on grounds that liited purpose copan"has no assets %rincipals could ha-e in>ected resources into copan" siilarl" to pro-idingdeposit................................................................................................................

ured.8orti%er v. C$%eron (1992) 3$#ts...............................................................8

LA1 of %ortgages G TER%S.........................................................@#0urchase money mortgage............................................................................:9;5


21/95

P a g e | 21

Rights of Lender , $F/orrower in de$ault o$ pa"ent $or 65 da"s, su/>ect to 30 da"s o$notice..................................................................................................................:

Right to sue on acceleration en$orce acceleration clause, call ortgage de/t /alance

:

K right o$ lender to power o$ sale or to clai >udicial sale.............................:

$ eHercised, dut" o$ lender to /orrower to account $or surplus, diGerence /tw loan

aount T sale price su/>ect to secondar" ortgagees rights, entitled to aount owed $rosurplus................................................................................................................ :

Right o$ lender to take possession................................................................:

*udgeent against owner or ortgagor, not B@(pre-ents against dou/le reco-er", /ut does F@( /ar right to reco-er against other originalortgagor*s.......................................................................................................6

< 20*2 $ Agreeent to assue o/ligates grantee to indeni$" original ortgagor wrp to

ortgagee, ortgagee onl" retains right to reco-er against grantee, not registered owner,unless action alread" coenced against original ortgagor. Right o$ ortgagor to reco-erpersonal >udgeent against 6st grantee eHtinguished on registration o$ a grant or trans$er o$eDuit" o$ redeption /" grantee to another person...........................................6

'lasses lia/le to ortgagee $or Action on 'o-enantRight o$ Repa"ent 6

Consider =ho has assets =hen deciding =ho to sue.........................6


22/95

P a g e | 22

@ptions o$ EHpress K ters to proacti-el" protect ortgagees interests against/reach o$ personal co-enant..............................................................6Assu%+tion $gree%ent creates pri-it" o$ K /tw grantee and ortgagee, J agrees toassue ortgage, a" /ut not necessaril" /e negotiated to release original ortgagoragainst all lia/ilities............................................................................................ 6Agree%ent to $ssu%e bt7 %ortg$gor (8) $nd gr$ntee (6) creates o/ligation ongranteesu/seDuent purchaser to indeni$" against lia/ilit" $or repa"entaction onco-enant............................................................................................................. 6

-ue on s$leT #l$use n an" con-e"ance, is entitled to call ortgage de/t unless appro-es su/seDuent ; ortgagor still reDuired to guarantee repa"ent, /ut '@)#negotiate release $ro co-enant........................................................................6@o 6reKudi#e Cl$useT reser-ation that no eHtension o$ tie gi-en, or wai-er, $ailure toen$orce rights or any other dealings, on part o$ ortgagor shall in an" wa" aGect orpre>udice the rights o$ the ortgagee against ortgagor $or pa"ent o$ aounts secured /"ortgage *against registered owner or new agreeent w B.............................6

$nterest Act s; "..........................................................................7*

%rinciple ortgagee cant charge interest when ortgage pa"ents in de$ault...........................................................................................................6

Po=er of Sale Remed)................................................................72Steps of %nalysis.............................................................................................2*6 pro-ident sale action or de$ence............................................................2*2 Mhat is the alleged dut" that has /een /reachedL....................................2*3 #id EE $all /elow


23/95

P a g e | 23

*60 ensure that eGorts are conducted o-er a reasona/le period o$ tie...........2

EHaples o$ ipro-ident sale............................................................3(Wood duty to obt$in $++r$is$lsP $dvertise $iledP i%+rovident s$le)(he courtsholds that a lender should ta6e into account the common tendenc) to (argain in a real estatetransaction.ere, lender sold right awa" 1 court $ound appraisal dut" not $ul&lled. 3%pt" wasnt eHposed to arket $or a sucient period o$ tie............................3(Sterne * $ilure to $dvertiseP i%+rovident s$le) Crt held that /c it was a ho//" $ar,lender had a dut" to ad-ertise in (oronto and ailton. But $or $ailing to ad-ertise, purchase

price that would ha-e /een o/tained could ha-e /een 25 K..............................3CA C$seP held li$ble or i%+rovident s$le).ere, $or lender hired appraisal $riend,asked $or appraisal /ack and that he not keep copies o$ it. %pt" sold $or 62.5; kt -alue, 6.#aages $or 3.5 il and costs...........................................................................3

RE%EF , %&RTAEE $' P&SSESS$&'......................................73Princi!le %ortgagee is entitled to ta6e !ossession if /*%&R is in default of

!a)ment =ithin one da). There is no notice re9uirement. . /2 $f %EE ta6es!ossession; he assumes statutor) duties. &ccu!iers Lia(ilit) Act;Residential Tenanc); En-ironmental Act /i.e. assumes legal !ersonalit) of%&R in default G=hat a!!lies to former a!!lies to %EE /3 1hen he decides

to sells notice of sale re9uirement is triggered...........................73

En-ironental, i$ ortgage propert" is containated, statutor" onus onortgagee in possession to clean up the propert".%EE =ould often doen-ironmental assess. $f cost of clean u! e


24/95

P a g e | 24

S+43/- E'ception:(his rule does not appl" to stay or waste inury. An" other stepsreDuire lea-e o$ court......................................................................................... 4

udiciall" super-ised sale! reDuest that EEsell rather than $oreclose. $ EE cannot sell, it a" reappl" to recon-ert action into$oreclosure.......................................................................................................... 5

Secondar) %ortgagees / %ortgagors and Rights.....................75

Right o$ action on the co-enant right o$ repa"ent *sur-i-es $oreclosure o$

eDuit" o$ redeption i$ @R has no assets, EE2 will not en$orce5

Right o$ action $or ipro-ident sale..............................................5

Right o$ to put ortgage in good standing...................................5

*E onl" Right o$ $oreclosure su/>ect to &rst ortgagee rights. Fo one will

pre$er >udicial sale to $oreclosure, i$ appraisal easures ppt" -alue is /elow (-alue..................................................................................................5%ower o$


25/95

P a g e | 25

a ortgagee eHercises power o$ sale *6/" wa" o$ notice -ia registered ail toortgagor , and *2e-er" su/seDuent encu/rancer , *3i$ @R in de$ault $or at least 65,da"s, *40with 35 da" redeption period to recti$" the arreas............................5/ Act o$ sale eHtinguishes rights o$ an" su/seDuent encu/rancer . EE 6 has dut" toaccount surplus, &rst su/seDuent encu/rancers in priorit", then to @R........5c @/ligations o$ EE 6 anal"sis a/o-e..........................................................5$F there is no remaining surplus or de"ciency ,.........................................5

Action on the 'o-enant, engage this anal"sis...................................5

a $ surplus does not co-er ortgage de/t owing to second encu/rancer, EE 2 hasright to sue on the co-enantor ortgagor on the co-enant right o$ repa"ent5

&nce a mortgage al=a)s a mortgage.........................................7@1hether or a transaction is a disguised form of mortgage is one of fact Ge-idence of all surrounding circumstances intention of !arties. $f anagreement discloses characteristics of mortgage agreement; then thesituation esta(lishes rights and res!onsi(ilities of a mortgagor,mortgagee...................................................................................................7@

Arnal -. Arnal SCA *#@#: E-en i$ transact not called a ortgage, /ut looks and

sells like one it ust /e treated as a ortgage *'onsider intention andrelationship o$ parties, &nancing in eHchange $or arketa/le asset akin to eDuit"o$ redeption. >ere:


26/95

P a g e | 26

Relati-e /argaining powers o$ parties, conduct in reaching agreeentL......

the potential $or the de/tor to en>o" an un>usti&ed wind$all.........................

3 'onteHtual approach /ased on all surrounding circustances! se-erance, nullit", reduceinterest !.............................................................................................................

$F SE9ER%!CE !otional or 5lue 0encil ,(he pre$erred se-erance techniDue is the

one that, in light o$ the particular contractual conteHt in-ol-ed, would ost appropriatel" curethe illegalit" while reaining otherwise as close as possi/le to the eHpress intentions o$parties in K..........................................................................................................

2. $ not illegal, consider whether transact unconsciona/le under. nconsciona(le Transactions Relief Act; RS&....................................

'ourt a" 2/eHercise discretion to relie-e de/tor, /$Fat least in part, o$ the o/ligations o$a contract to which in all the circustances o$ the case he cannot /e said to ha-e gi-en a$ree and -alid consent,....................................................................................... 3. Barsh and unreasonable mortgage defence 4/ %art" rel"ing on de$ence ust showunconsciona/le transact *a grossl" un$air ipro-ident transact */ de/tor s A,sophistication, *c power i/alance caused /" ignorance, illiterac", language /arrier or otherdisa/ilit", *d other part knowingl" takes ad-antage o$ -ulnera/ilit" (itus A)S 2!, $rrie v. >!22 "nt$rio Ltd............................................................./Action $or reco-er" o$ ortgage one"s, or daages $or negligence against @R 1

'eldI2/ $or # $ound lia/le under s 34, agreeent to pa" interest, -oid andunen$orcea/le,, pa" a/le at aturit" rate 30 da"s a$ter ortg agreeent, se-eral $ro loanagreeent / acting $or lender has an o/ligation to -eri$" legalit" o$ lending arrangeentsso as to contra-ene s 34, otherwise is lia/le $or negligence.............................'ere! B goes to $riend to /orrow 680K, 60K interest, repa"ent in 30 da"s. B re$uses to pa"60K /onus /c in eHcess o$ legal interest rate per annu.. sues her law"er +. .S 2! & 6rov A#t Cres7ell v y$n $y 'oldings.........................................>eld: % did not discharge onus under s 34. oan price o$ 380K T interest at K, totalpurchase price not to eHceed 35K, and $ees to #s agent.................................@nus not discharged /c %s could not proo$ # was o/liged to pa" agents $ee 1 that # agreedto ake loan onl" on condition that % enter into an agreeent where the" pa" the $ee. Foe-idence that # would ha-e re$used to ad-ance credit i$ $ee not paid, % willing to pa"

custoar" &nders $ee........................................................................................?n#ons#ion$bility deen#e, i#h%ond v J$%es..........................................# clais harsh and unconsciona/le de$ence to an action on the co-enant against her /"ortgagee.......................................................................................................... 'eldI.................................................................................................................. @orth A%eri#$n +ress , s 2!(1). %pplied notional se(erance (s+ blue pencilse(erance.........................................................................................................+leHi/le reed" warranted in this case. ender did not -iolate s 34*6*A, K ser-ed acoercial purpose, no illegal intention, coerciall" eHperienced parties, A , eDuities o$situation $a-our lender in presence A, parties knew o/ligations.....................3$#tsIBorrower had to pa" ro"alt" T certain coissions. t looked as i$ there were a lot o$other $actors other than the rate o$ interest. n the end, the net interest rate cae to 8:P.

...........................................................................................................................

Triggering %ortgage....................................................................7"

%rinciple! $ EE coences an action $or $oreclosure or >udicial sale, thistriggers right o$ @R to pa" oG closed $ull ortgage de/t owing without penalt";does not con-ert close to open ortgage.........................................8

E'ception:.........................................................................................................8C$nbook -istribution v orins......................................................................8'eld! (7 accepts


27/95

P a g e | 27

Rule:oint tenanc", court a" eHercise discretion to sell propert" orse-er the >oint tenanc" a/sent a eHpress agreeent /etween partners. &nus onclaimant to demonstrate intention of !arties.....................................8

Draudulent Con-e)ance Act; ss 2,3.............................................7"

< 2, E-er" con-e"ance o$ real propert" ... ade with intent to de$eat, hinder,dela" or de$raud creditors ... o$ their >ust and law$ul actions ... are -oid asagainst such persons.........................................................................8< 3 = < 2 does not appl"....................................................................8X. to an estate or interest in real propert" ... con-e"ed upon good considerationand in good $aith to a person not ha-ing at the tie o$ the con-e"ance to theperson notice or knowledge o$ the intent set $orth in that section....8Deher - >eale)...................................................................................8eld! claiant, nephew o$ , had not esta/lished trans$er o$ $ro M to

children was a $raudulent con-e"ance, FM< sep agreeent was ne-er signed,there was an oral proise. Reason $or trans$er was part o$ a coprehensi-esettleent o$ all &nancial atters in-ol-ing couple and children. M had wai-ed'< and


28/95

P a g e | 28

E*cl%si'e listingn effect for a fi,ed period of time d)ring (!ic! listing agent (ill %e sole recipient earns commission$ 'pas less commission$ %)t propert not listed t!ro)g!

+%rc,aser !b%-er$: refers to part %)ing t!e propert/ '#s agent paid indirectl % P/

%-er/s Re&resentation greeent !R$+ esta%lis!es (ritten %t&( P agent % (!ic! agent e,cl)si"el representsP$ P can eit!er pa commission directl to agent or to allo( agent to %e paid % s!aring t!e listing agent#s commission%eing paid % '

"%t%al good ait, d%t- o + V

Vendor/s Reorse ' sells propert and t!en a (ee* later or mont! later$ ' sas t!at ne"er s!o)ld !a"e sold

losing ates date on ,ic, con'e-ance takes eect

Tie is o t,e essence ) i t,e cla%se is breac,ed or contra'ened t,en V as not re%ired to relin%is, title to +

:oldo'er &ro'isionsefers to a term t!at !olds seller and&or p)rc!ase lia%le to pa commission to real estate agentafter listing agreement or ;. e,pires if t!e sale propert is sold (it!in < das of t!e agreement e,pir date ;. + or if Pp)rc!ases a !ome (it!in < das

Real Estate %gents: Standards of Conduct0rinciple Agent ust ake $ull and $air disclosure to the principal o$ all aterialcircustances likel" to inCuence the conduct o$ the principal *here the dut" to get the/est price $or the appellant -endors conCicted with his dut" to respondents *conCict o$

interest($so/= ;ES;:Mhat a reasona/le agent would consider as likel" to inCuencethe conduct o$ the principal in siilar circustances(Selkirk)

Selkirk v. J. A. Willoughby & Sons Ltd. (1959), S.C.. !5

P !o(e"er$ made it a condition of offer t!at !is identit (o)ld not %e disclosed to t!e "endor/>ffer (as s)%mitted % agent$ acting as nominee for t!e )ndisclosed p)rc!aser ++ a fact clearl set o)t in t!eoffer/ ? "endor accepted t!e offer$ %)t ref)sed to pa t!e agent !is commission on t!e gro)nds t!at !e (o)ld

not !a"e dealt (it! P @)estion if !e !ad *no(n !is identit and t!at t!e agent !ad %een (or*ing for s)c!p)rc!aser to t!e sacrifice of t!e "endor#s interests/ P-s agent s)ed for commission/

SCCRT;RBeld:Agent Entitled to his 'oission; Agent did not /reach his dut". +ull disclosurethat the oGer was ade on /ehal$ o$ an undisclosed purchaserRULE: Agent ust act honestlyand loyallyw strictest good faithtowards hisprincipal and for the principals e'clusi(e bene"t. (here must be full disclosureto the principal of all material circumstances within agents *nowledge. $agent has /reached its dut", he will /e disentitled to coission *the hallmar6 of Din a SC relationshi! and in agent,client relationshi!agent did !a"e a d)t to act in "endor-s interests %)t no e"idence t!at agent sacrificed interests of t!e "endorT!ere ' !ad c!oices co)ld !a"e$ i ref)sed to consider t!e offer$ ii said t!at !e (o)ld not accept t!e offerif t!e p)rc!aser (ere a certain person$ or iii accepted t!e offer/Aa"ing decided to accept t!e offer$ "endor co)ld not claim t!e agent %reac!ed !is d)t % failing to disclose!ere identit of p)rc!aser (as not material

"#e$n City e$lty Li%ited v. A & 'oldings Ltd. (19!) CCA * S#o+e o duty

'endor listed (it! agent and stip)lated t!at !e (as firm on !is as*ing price/ isting agent (as to get 91commission/ P)rc!aser offered to pa f)ll price on t!e condition t!at !e get B of t!e listing agent-scommission/ .gent agreed$ %)t did not disclose to principle/ 'endor disco"ered side deal$ ref)sed to pa


29/95

P a g e | 29

commission/

'A agent /reached her &duciar" dut" /" $ailing to disclose = not entitled tossionto disclosenot con&ned to instances where agent has gained an ad-antage, whereo ight aGect the -alue o$ the propert" or where a conCict o$ interest eHists!et!er agent is re@)ired to ma*e disclos)re of information in @)estion is an o%Decti"e test (!at a%le agent in similar circ)mstances (o)ld consider as li*el to infl)ence t!e cond)ct of t!e principal/ Eo)rt

s not )p to t!e agent to ma*e an ar%itrar decision/ C!en in do)%t$ agent m)st %e disclose$

ge !eld t!ere (as no conflict$ no need to disclose

Fnli*e T?$ E. fo)nd t!at d)t of disclos)re not confined to instances (!ere agent !as gained anad"antage$ (!ere t!e info mig!t affect t!e "al)e of t!e propert or (!ere a conflict of interest e,ists/ C!enin do)%t agent m)st disclose/

$so v. -ionigi (199), 1/ ".. (d) 50 ("nt. C.A.) du$l $gen#y

see*ing for in"estment propert !ired !er %rot!er in la( as seller-s agent/ .gent approac!ed ' (!o (as notsting at t!e time and sec)red a listing agreement + agent acting for P and ' in t!is case/ .n offer (as made ine maiden name of t!e p)rc!aser to deli%eratel conceal P#s relations!ip to agent/

disco"ered t!is ref)sed to closeP s)ed for specific performance$ and agent s)ed for commission

$ $ull disclosure not ade then an agent is prohi/ited $ro acting $or /oth % 1 .agent not entitled to commission bc of breach of duty to obtain highest

ble price for sale property, and purchasers not entitled to an e#uitable relief,for S0, bc they were complicit in breach . Fo eDuita/le relie$ without clean hands

rial: fo)nd t!at agent %reac!ed fid)ciar d)t in not disclosing %)t a(arded specific performance and B commission one %asis t!at t!e "endor got !is as*ing price and (o)ld !a"e closed e"en if !e *ne( identit of p)rc!aser %)t (o)ld nota"e signed listing agreement$ instead in"ol"ing o(n agent/

t,is as a breac, o id%ciar- d%t- ) agent ailed to ake %ll disclos%re o aterial act t,at t,e &rice as airas irrele'ant

onse@)ence of %reac! of =? d)t: Once it has been determined that there has been non disclosure of material fact bygent breach of fiduciary duty!, ....it is not open to seek to prove that the transaction would have closed even if disclosureade"se of $%s maiden name was a deliberate strategy used to conceal $%s relationship to A brother & sister in law!


30/95

P a g e | 30

Bodg*inson (+ Simms 2DD4/ SCC L%> 6F F7

7%


31/95

P a g e | 31

%gent as 0urchaser

s+ 3 Real Estate and 5usiness 5ro*ers %ct, HH regulations where REis a purchaser s+3+ *6 without pro-iding appropriate notice, no real estate agent shall directl" or indirectl"

a purchase, lease, eHchange or otherwise acDuire $or hisel$, hersel$, or itsel$, an" interest inreal estate, or ake an

/ oGer to do so; orc di-est hisel$, hersel$, or itsel$ o$ an" interest in real estate, or ake an oGer to do so.

S 3/ Contents of !otice ++in su/section *6 shall /e in writing and shall include,

d a stateent that the registrant is a /rokerage, /roker or salesperson, as the case a" /e;e $ull disclosure o$ all $acts within the registrants knowledge that aGect or will aGect the

-alue o$ the real estate

Consider Remedies: Restitutionar" #aages #isgorgeent o$ %ro&ts,'opensator" #aages, Reedial '( $or )R *$or /reach o$ +# or + un>ustl"enriched i$ peritted to keep propert", Soulos, %uniti-e #aages

C$l$ndr$ v. .A. Cle$ners (1990), ! ".. (/d) 22*As $ailure to disclose intent to purchase

? (as a commercial tenant (it!in a plaNa$ and its landlord$ t!e plaNa o(ner (as selling t!e propert/ ?so)g!t assistance from P to ma*e an offer as it#s selling agent$ (!o s)%mitted t(o offers not accepted %t!e landlord/ P$ .$ s)%mitted an offer to p)rc!ase O a !ig!er price and !ad not terminated !is =/?#s lease agreement (it! lessor contained a sale and deolition cla%se stating t,at lessor ill retainrig,t to terinate lease %&on sale or desired deolition o b%ilding/P sends letter of termination to ?$ former p)rc!asers$ (it! intent t!at t!e (ill sta and renegotiate !ig!erprice/

Re>ection o$ a a %)s oGer does not terinate the &duciar" relationship /w %) agent)/reached +# to %)# /" $ailing to disclose intent to purchase, though %As coissionaid /" .

# held lia/le $or cost o$ repairs, . K. % held lia/le $or /reach o$ +#, # was awardedtionar" daages disgorged pro&ts T costs

Lee v. Cho7 (1990)*As $ailure to disclose intent to purchase

P retained agent to assist (it! p)rc!ase of a residential propert (ort! 1 negotiations %ro*e off/ T!in*ingt!at P (as no longer interested$ agent %o)g!t propert in A-s name deal closed and agent notified Pt!at s!e !ad %o)g!t t!e propert


32/95

P a g e | 32

Fiduciary must a(oid con&ict of interest, li*e reaping personal gain, withpaland ust alwa"s ake $ull disclosure; -alue o$ agenc" relationship would /eetel" destro"ed i$ &duciar" allowed to act in direct copetition with principaloning! +R $ound, % relied on A $or ad-ice. A held lia/le $or /reach o$ +#, in $ailing tose intent to purchase, and used cop w liited assets in s nae to purchase ppt",so, A had actual or constructi-e knowledge o$ Ms isuse o$ con&dential in$o% was entitled to reedial '( $or )R clai $or /reach o$ +#.)R contri/ution here! con&dential in$o that A gained $ro %), %, in course o$

nship

Soulos v. 4orkont) *dual agenc", A lia/le, $ailed to ake $ull 1 $rank disclosure

' retained agent$ to list on !is %e!alf /. decided to %) propert personall$ and s)ggested t!at t!e "endor)se !is la(er at closingCit!in a fe( mont!s of o(ners!ip$ t!e agent s)%di"ided t!e propert into 5 lots andsold for 120 %o)g!t for 40/' disco"ered t!is and s)ed t!e agent for not disclosing t!at t!is co)ld %e done

%gent held liable for breach of F7+ was awarded disgorgeent o$ pro&ts, /ut

was entitled to coission. A could not pro-e transact was a righteous one, lackedce that had A a/out transact or that A had aintained $ull disclosure. e had noa/out eHplaining that could recei-e ore. 'ourt eHpected to recei-e a $ull written

ent a/out As discussion w .

>here a selling agent owes a F7 to (endor, the onus is on the selling agentn"rm ac*nowledgement of the circumstances by the (endor+!aid for !ro!ert) must (e ade9uate and the transaction must (e a righteous oneK; andce !aid to the !rinci!al should (e as ad-antageous K...as a !rice of o(tained from a TP


33/95

P a g e | 33

"s#$r ?nited =rou+ ;n#. v. Chee, /01/ "@SC (like 'odgkinson, +unitive d$%$ges)

Egregious, intentional, outrageous, decepti-e warrants an award o$ puniti-e daages.

uciar" is lia/le $or /reach o$ dut" where he consciously andor deliberatelydoes notn the /est interests o$ his principal.

claim only for puniti(e e'emplary damages/:'onsultant owed a +# (o %. Beno obligation to disclose purchasing ppty, in relation to which % retained ', toide an opinion on whether lands could /e de-eloped. # deli/eratel" acted in his owninterests to the detrient o$ client

Listing %greement and Conditionss+ 3 Real Estate and 5usiness 5ro*ers %ct, HHonl" allows RE agents a" sue or /ring an action to reco-er coissionoore v. or$d *onl" RE agents are statutoril" entitled to coission pa"ents

A $unctional approach used to assess whether a contractual ter reDuiring a part" to$ee constitutes a coission pa"ent /ased on all surrounding circustances. $ it isered as coission, ser-ice pro-ider is not entitled to this pa"ent unless a RE agent.

# is not lia/le to pa" ?introduction $ee? to the B. +acts support that it is a coission

etro+olit$n rust Co. v. L$tv$l$ et $l (19!9) *clients not lia/le to pa" coission a$ter %

P and ' (ere introd)ced d)ring t!e listing period$ formed a deal aro)nd ?ec 28$ and p)rposel (aited )ntilafter t!e e,pir of t!e !old o"er period$ after ?ec 31$ to sign t!e .P attempt to e"ade commissions

?t is also clear that the parties conducted thesel-es deli/eratel" designed to a-oident o$ the coission /ut its a K,? so the agent did not recei-e coission

An agent is not entitled to coission i$ the deal is closed a$ter the holdo-er period,e the deli/erate, underhanded tactics o$ the %urchaser and endor.

on oulot nter+rises Ltd. v. 4ots#horek (190) BC * *clients lia/le $or post %coission

#e$endant clients lia/le to pa" coission. Agent*s had eGected sale and wereental to it prior to eHpiration o$ listing agreeent

$Fan agent is the causa causans *last link in the chain o$ a sale transaction whiches YeGecti-e during the %, the agent is entitled to coission although the A%< wasned until a$ter period.

te of Frauds -, agreements related to RE must be in writing, so i$ its not ing, its not en$orcea/le unless there are eleents o$ part per$orance


34/95

P a g e | 34

3irst City e$lty Ltd. v. 'er%$ns (/002) *cond precedent $or As entitleent to coission

$ an agent seeks to pursue a coission on a listing agreeent, the agreeent /e

trued strictl"

# client not liableto pa" coission $or co. propert", onl" res propert".

urpose o$ the clause is ore than a $oralit" = widespread use o$ standard $or listing

eents and commercial certainty re#uire the courts to enforce the term

oning:A was reDuired to /e pro-ide with a list o$ all %)< introduced during listingod in order to /e entitled to coission, and $ailed to do so re! co. propert"

=idd$ v. $lik L$7 "#e. D/00>E "@SC

enters into listing agreeent with Agent. signs deal, a-oids contact w Agent to e-adent o$ coission. sues law"er on the /asis that law"er should not ha-e disclosed the pri-atential agreeent to agent who isrepresented hersel$ as in order to o/tain the A%< ntial in$oration.


35/95

P a g e | 35

and t!at t!ere s!o)ld %e relief from forfeit)re/

!o relief from forfeiture for the defaulting buyer+ 7eposit was only O ofpriceor was a shell company no assets/+;o determine whether or not payment is a penalty , the court will e'amine all

al circumstances such as: >ho was the0UJ Company with limited assets orcompanyJcial (iability of purchaserJ >hat is 9s e'posure to damagesJ >hen will theaction closeJ $f longer period, deposit can be larger/>hat percentage of salethe deposit representsJ

6orto v. -i-o%i), 50 .6.. (/d) 11

gi-es two deposits, totaling 36.25 P o$ purchase price. %) ga-e 2nd$or later closing

ntitled to copensator" daages, and 6st deposit, 60K, /ut had to return 2nddeposit o$

#eposits can sa$el" -ar" , 3=60P o$ sale price depending on the tie /etween thease 1 close date

Cu%berl$nd e$lty =rou+ Ltd. v. .L.. 'oldings Lid. (192), (Alt$ C.A))( & ")

ang)age in mort agreement$ parties agree t!is is a fair estimate of t!e damages$ and it is not a penalt/ f (eo(ers are in %reac!$ t!en commitment fee is forfeited to lender/er P see*s loan of 3$ gi"es 61/5 commitment/ ;orro(er decides to (it!dra( from loan$ and as*s foress costs/ ender ref)ses$ claims !e is *eeping it as li@)idated damages/er arg)es amo)nt is too !ig! to %e a fair estimate of damages$ and (as t!erefore a penalt

>hether deposit is e'tra(agant and unconscionable depends on nature ofaction+ $ deposit does not eHceed greatest loss thatcould (e suered; then !ro(a(l)consc.der was entitled to keep pa"ent, it was a general pre=estiate o$ daages.

Borrower puts ortgage $unds into in-estent.. E

if word deposit is used it is a guarantee of performance and will be lost woof damagesproportion not unconsciona/le and entitled to retain whole deposit wo proo$ o$

ges. 60K deposit on sale price o$ 280, represented 3.P *


36/95

P a g e | 36

.= 6ree#o (6$#iF# Co$st) Ltd. v. ond Street -evelo+%ents 199 d$%$ges or r$ud%isre+

(he proper award for fraudulent misrepresentationis the aount reDuired toe innocent part" in the position the" would ha-e /een in had there /een no $raud# shell copan" lia/le $or daages $or 400 K. would ha-e /een entitled to 500K /ut $raudulent isrep. # isrepresented itsel$ as a shelf company without assets.%) was not lia/le $or daages incurred $ro su/seDuent sale o$ 6. . arket went

$ter %) dropped out transact, and sold to %2 at 3 -s. original sale price $or %6 at 4.

Conditional %greements

urney v. Ghilk$, D1959E S.C.. 5! 6? #ould not 7$ive C"

Q signed an agreement to p)rc!ase propert from T$ and agreement contained term t!at transaction(as condition on propert %eing anne,ed to "illage of treets"ille Pro"iding t!e propert can %eanne,ed to t!e 'illage of treets"ille and a plan is appro"ed % t!e 'illage Eo)ncil for s)%di"ision/

' ref)ses to close %&c cond (as not met/

Z could not unilaterall" wai-e Atrue ;C0A*which depends on the eHistence o$ a (%.ion not satis&ed, /ut no /reach, so not entitled to 9E S.C. * 6? #ould not 7$ive C6 7o righto 7$iver

P agrees to %) propert from ' on condition t!at !e is a%le to %) adDoining propert %)t t!is did notocc)r p)rc!aser (anted to (ai"e condition an!o(

A true condition precedent cannot /e unilaterall" wai-ed *Zhilka, unless a purchaser

rts a agreeent a Pright of wai(erQ in the agreeent

(he ('% in this case cannot /e wai-ed in the a/sence o$ the o$ the right o$ wai-er

se

$rnett v. '$rrison, D19!>E / S.C.. 51 121 * $r%s urney, no #o%+elling re$son

not to.P contained conditions inserted % P$ necessar appro"al as to site plan and Noning %e so)g!tand o%tained s)%Dect to certain time limits/ ig!t of (ai"er (as not imposed on Noning condition/ P(as not a%le to f)lfill conditions despite %est efforts$ and sent letter of (ai"er to forego all conditions/' ref)sed to close on gro)nds (as .P conditions !ad not %een f)lfilled/ ar*et "al)e of propertincreased and ' (ants to sell to someone else/ P %rings an action for P and claims !e (ai"edcompliance of conditions solel for !is %enefit/


37/95

P a g e | 37

A %) does not ha-e an iplied right to wai-e a ('% unless he esta/lishes a copellingn $or doing so *diss askin 7, %) should ha-e iplied right o$ wai-er on conds inserted

/ene&t

S$


38/95

P a g e | 38

'$rl$nd v. 3$n#s$li (1992), /1 ".. (d) !9 * r$udulent %isre+ & 7$iver o #ond.

P co)ld not satisf .P cond to sell !is !o)se (&in a fe( mont!s %)t P (anted t!e ppt / ' ,ad rig,t o irstcond$ co)ld re@)ire PF to (ai"e cond if ' recei"es 2ndoffer !e is (illing to accept s)%Dect to notice to PF/ V

,a'e re%sed to sell to + at loer &rice ,ile ai'ing conditions/ PF agent s)ggested to p)t in anot!erat 380$ %)t at 370 instead of conditional$ in t!e maiden name of PF Cife ' tells PF t!ere is anot!er

P1s don-t (ai"e t!e cond ' sells to t!e C for 370osing 'endor inds o%t ,at ,ad occ%rred and s%es t,e &%rc,aser ) ,e o%ld not ,a'e closed i ,e%ed or 10@

6:aiden nae or shell copan" a" /e used to purchase a propert" unless course o$ct is done $or the purposes o$ isrepresentation7 ! "nt$rio Ltd. v. @ov$te# Constru#tion Ltd. (1999) estoppel 1 tie liits on cond

ig!t of (ai"er on a d)e diligence condition imposes a time limit s)c! t!at E>I? m)st %e (ai"ed % Io"15$ at 4:00 P$ or agreement is "oidPF !ad not finis!ed d)e diligence to satisf itself t!at it (anted to %) propert and at 3:23 $ for PF calls'-s Er and as*s for an e,tension of time for t!e (ai"er of condition R (ants one da e,traL or V said A,e said ,e didnBt t,ink it o%ld be a &roble b%t ,e ,ad to c,eck it, client )) ,ore%sed. +C ai'es cond ater 4+" tie lit on cond ,as e*&ired V calls o deal

cannot /ind principal without instructions to act; /ut i$ the" are slipshod with words,ce a" /ind principal

could not rel" on the tie o$ the essence pro-ision due to s representation that

pro/a/l" grant the tie eHtension, led to a clear eHpectation that the 4!00 deadlinenot /e insisted upon. is estopped, /c o$ %)s reliance onrepresentation, $rog there was an eHtension o$ the '@F# period.

-e%eri v 47$n & 47$n Ltd. D/00E 2 notices o$ wai-er are sent due to a/ig conds clauses,struck as null and -oid

A%< is -oid $or want o$ certaint" /c the deli-er" o$ two wai-ers created a/iguit"n an A%


39/95

P a g e | 39

t!at it got to c*ee personall t!at da/ .fter 6 :00 P t!e %ac*)p agreement (as triggered/' entered into a %ac*)p agreement conditional )pon non+performance of initial agreement

6st Agreeent is not /inding /c % did not deli-er notice o$ wai-er in accordance withr" reDuireents applica/le to wai-er o$ due diligence condition; pro- interpretedr" as seller reDuiring notice /e personall" deli-ered to in person at s address,r" to hoe address was not sucient

(he court ust conteHtuall" interpret the notice o$ wai-er o$ the due diligence

ion /" eHaining the language o$ the agreeent as a whole and what it conteplates,nding pro-ision, industr" standards

6bligation to Satisfy Conditions0lanning %ct

%n owner of abutting parcel of land or on a reference plan and remains an owner ofabutting land/ cannot su/di-ide, con-e" or sell parcel wo 'oittee o$ Ad>ustentsappro-al

to create a su/di-ision a registered plan is reDuired, incls ser-ices, a" take up to 3 "ears

A%< t"picall" on cond o$ appro-al or copliance with the %lanning Act, cannot be wai(ed

A part" that /ears the o/ligation o$ $ul&lling a ('% has a good $aith dut" o$ per$orance

rence plan sur-e"ed ap o$ the ppt", does not guarantee presence o$ ser-ice,s roadsered plan registered with inistr", appro-al o$ 'oittee o$ Ad>ustents

Mhat is a/utting land at an" pointLand that eets, and that eets at a corner like acheck/oard does not /reach the and %lanning Act

s 8H:Fo interest in land unless s 50 o$ the %lanning Acts is coplied with; no person shall

trans$er land or ortgage enter into an agreeent with respect to land that in-ol-es an interestthat goes $or 26 "ears or ore unless person does not own an" a/utting land

s 2: $ "ou /reach an" o$ the pro-s o$ Act, "ou do not acDuire an" interests in land. + "ou gi-ea deed or trans$er in /reach o$ Act, %) and lender /arred $ro title acDuisition or chargelean onland respecti-el"

;itle insurance= is a to indeni$" a purchaser, owner or lender $or actual lossesincurred up to the liits o$ the polic" policy issued that title has no defects =forcertain stated ris*s= = no title, no arketa/ilit", no right to use the ppt" as a single$a residence, ppt" access, no encu/rances, $raud

$%+leG Purchase title insurance !olic) -s. s!ending cost of title search to ensureresidential area is 4oned for residential !ur!oses.

Alder#rest -e+ts. Ltd. v. 'unter (19!0) "@ CA * $r%s good $ith duty in +eror%ingC6

>ffer to p)rc!ase (as s)%Dect to planning act appro"al for land se"erance it (as t!e '-s )al o%ligation to o%tain t!eappro"al of t!e committee of adD)stments p)rs)ant to t!e act .fter corresponding (it! mem%ers of t!e committee t!e' (as not confident a%o)t o%taining consent to transfer ne"er made a formal application for se"erance/ ' tried toterminate t!e agreement$ P %rings action for specific performance


40/95

P a g e | 40

7: 0U awarded S0+ lia/le $or /reach o$ good $aith dut" to satis$" cond. e erel"ulated app to 'oittee o$ Ad>ustents would $ail wo aking an application /ased onspondence w coittee e/ersE: Jood $aith dut" eHists upon part" who /ears onus o$ per$oring a ('%, is lia/le i$ inch.

-yn$%i# r$ns+ort Ltd. v. ".4. -et$iling Ltd., D19!E / S.C.. * scope of good faithduty

.P silent as to (!et!er ' or P (o)ld o%tain t!is Planning .ct appro"al/ ' did not ma*e an applicationto t!e adD)stments committee/ Ae t!en p)rported to cancel sale/

E!plied ter o$ K that the part" who is responsi/le $or satis$"ing the conditioncedent is under an o/ligation to do all that is necessar" to satis$" the condition and

plete the sale.

+ part"-endor succeeds in satis$"ing the condition the propert" ust /e con-e"ed;

+ part" acts in good $aith and is unsuccess$ul, then the K is terinated;

+ part" does nothing, lia/le $or daages or in>unction o$ per$orance

! lia/le $or /reach o$ good $aith dut" to per$or this cond.'ourt ordered a andator"nction that do so

nter+rises Ltd. v. C$%+e$u Cor+or$tion (190) CSC, le$d #$se, good $ith dutytest

mpea) SE$ large s)ccessf)l and national compan$ o(ned t!e plaNa and !ad afe(a as a tenante(a (is!ed to e,pand t!e store and E approac!ed t!e neig!%oring residents (it! offers to p)rc!ase t!eir properties$Dect to 4 conditions incl)ding a condition of %eing a%le to p)rc!ase a specified n)m%er of properties and Noning appro"alese conditions (ere not satisfied$ E !ad t!e option to declare t!e agreement n)ll and "oid$ in (!ic! case all depositsnes (ere to %e retained % t!e "endors )n)s)al ter decided against e,pansion$ as E failed to sec)re an anc!or tenant + letters (ere sent earl to ' stating t!at E !ad

ed to satisf t!e conditions e" 's s)ed E$ arg)ing it %reac!ed its good fait! d)t$ s)edfor P

;:(he standard o$ conduct reDuired o$ a part" under its iplied o/ligations iscti(e, /ased on the part" w iplied o/ligation in like circustances, ha-ing regard toe situation 1 parties thesel-essoning:' had honest /elie$ that cond wouldnt /e $ul&lled a$ter


41/95

P a g e | 41

o:% reasonable 0Uakes &nancing application to satis$" good $aith dut" to satis$" acing cond 6Rdoes not decide to withdraw $ro A%< unilaterall". (@ research

pecti-e &nancing ters without moreis insucient to discharge dut".(his does notn %) is /ound to &nancing app he could not aGord

:%) held lia/le $or daages $or B@K. *(' relied on $act that clause dra$ted so loosel" toit %) to -oid wo penalt" ere! %) et with lender, /ut ade decision unilaterall".

!!95 "nt$rio Ltd. v. sse (199) *8 dis#h$rged =3 duty, reus$l to %$ke $++ not%ere s+e#ul$tion, unlike Alder#rest, reus$l b$sed on good $uth

.P (as conditional )pon t!e P Sobtaining from the 'ity of (indsor re)*oning of the property suitable to PP (anted 155 to(n!o)ses %)t did not p)t e,plicitl in agreement/ ;+la( onl permits 142/+ ent to t,e ton &lanner in ;indsor t,e &erson instr%ental in t,e b-la and t,e c,ie &lannersaid t,ere as no c,ance to get ,at t,e + needed$ so !e didn#t (ant to ma*e a formal applicationP arg)ed !e (as entitled to a ret)rn of its deposit/ +C is not bo%nd to inancing a&& ,e co%ld not aord Vclaimed t!at t!e deposit (as forfeited/ + s%ed or ret%rn o de&osit

E:$ a part" has on good authorit" that a cond will not /e satis&ed, then dut" o$ good

is $ul&lled.

7: #eposit returned!% was not reDuired to ake application in light o$ 'hie$ %lannerscting re>ected o$ application. %) appropriatel" eHercised discretion honestl" and in$aith under A%< cond, that reIoning o/tained would notsuitable+

$st7$lsh 'o%es Ltd. v. An$t$l -evelo+%ents Ltd. (1990 )+rob$bility o $++rov$l in$7$rding d$%$ges #onsidered, like nter+rises, %ere +rob$bility 7$s lo7er

o)g!t a 100 acre parcel and entered into .P conditional on &lan o s%bdi'ision being registered b- t,e- a certain dateprior to closing "endor o%liged to )se %est efforts to register plan P %o)g!t propert for ; t!at certain date t!e plan (as not registered ' offers %ac* t!e deposit P ref)ses to ta*e it %ac* aspert no( (ort! 10 ' does not (ant to complete sale p)rc!aser %ro)g!t an action against t!e "endor to

t!ere (as no good fait! dealings in see*ing appro"al

!$ % cannot pro-e loss of a de"nite bene"t but only the loss of the AchanceA o$-ing a /ene&t, the court will estiate the -alue o$ the lost chance and award daagesortionatel"7

L! lia/le $or /reach o$ good $aith dut". #aages assessed at 20P o$ what %) would

-e recei-ed i$ were success$ul w registering su/di-ision

!ominal damages costs !>S good faith duty breach bc 9 would not li*ely(e been successful in satisfying cond according to time limit


42/95

P a g e | 42

7iscretionary Conditions 0recedentSole discretion clause -re$ers to pro-isions in agreeents that ake the per$orance o$ the

agreeent conditional or su/>ect to the ?satis$action, the discretion or the opinion o$ a part" tothe agreeent or o$ a third part"$rsh$ll v. ern$rd 6l$#e Cor+. (/00/),

esident propert listed at 1/5 million/ .P is conditional %&on t,e ins&ection o t,e +ro&ert- b- a ,oeins&ector o t,e +%rc,aser/s c,oice and at t,e +%rc,aser/s on e*&ense and recei&t o a re&ortsatisactor- to ,i in ,is sole and absol%te discretion/ Fnless P deli"ers notice or (ai"ers$ cond is

f)lfilled$ agreement is n)ll and "oid and deposit ret)rned/ .P also incl)des rig!t of (ai"er/ T!e res)ltinginspection report identified "ario)s deficiencies relating to t!e constr)ction$ design or condition of t!e !o)se/P relies on cond does not f)lfill it and (it!dra(s from transaction/ >ne mont! after terminating agreement$P entered into anot!er .P in t!e same neig!%o)r!ood and paid less and paid H1/6 million in reno"ating

;he sole discretion clausecan onl" /e relied upon *6 /" a part" acting honestl"n good $aith. *2(he eHtent to which the proper eHercise o$ a sole discretion clause issured /" o/>ecti-e or /" su/>ecti-e interests o$ a part" to the agreeent is a atter o$erpretation

oning:%)< did not rel" on cond. to escape A%< or purchase less eHpensi-e house, hadncial eans to do so, /ut repairs were de&ciencies that were incon-eniences + Lang ofretionary ;C0 did not entitle to repair inor de&ciencies i$ $ound or to decide

ther report &ndings were satis$actor". Clause did not en(isage such rights or itld ha(e been so stated+% was entitled to return o$ deposit, it was too high.

10>1590 "nt$rio Li%ited v. "nt$rio Jo#key Club (1995), /1 ".. * good $ith issue onSJ

82 &arcel o land listed it, sale &rice o 35 illion dollars +# s%bDect to condition t,at + at ,issole discretion ,as a rig,t to terinate i it belie'ed t,at en'ironental containation o t,eland or soil conditions o%ld increase t,e cost o or dela- de'elo&entP commissioned an en"ironmental site assessment$ res)lt (as t!at cost of clean )p (as 8 million$ andt!ere (as contaminationP agreed to s)ppl res)lts of test$ (!et!er it closed or notV got co&- o re&orts reDected t,e 'alidit- o t,e e*&erts' t!en retains is !is o(n inspector (!o did not find t!e concl)sions or estimates to %e "alidP claimed it (as !is discretionotion for G: P arg)ed t!ere (as no need for a trial and (anted deposit ref)ndedP claims acting reasona%l and in good fait!$ and is entitled to deposit/


43/95

P a g e | 43

% acted reasona/l" in rel"ing on reports, retained copetent eHperts and was entitledon the opinions o$ such eHperts in$oring the /elie$ that there was en-ironental

ination% need not pro-e that eHperts are right, >ust that he acted reasona/l" in rel"ing on

ed eHperts

%cting on 5oth Sides - $ndependent Legal %d(ice0rinciple: @/ligation to disclose to clients when acting on /oth sides o$ a transaction,

onus on to discharge /urden o$ proo$ that o/ligation was $ul&lleRE agent! $ conCict o$ interest, agent cannot act on /oth sidesLawyer: can act $or /oth sides, $or the realit" o$ the /usiness world and o$ten econoics dictatethis course o$ conduct su/>ect to copliance with LSUC

Consent in writing and noti$" partiesElement of disclosure i$ has a histor" or special relationship with the other client

!on-con"dentiality *6i$ retained, *2dut" to disclose all aterial $acts; dut" not to keepan"thing con&dential $ro one side to the other ;*3 i$ $uture conCict o$ interest arises, a"not /e a/le to continue acting $or either

0rinciple of $L% Re#uirement in 7ual %gency (-$vey 8 Woolley)

Lawyer must re#uire that a party obtain $L% when acting on both sides if there is an

improper con&ict of interest that e'ists or subse#uently arises:*6 *a $ s duties to another client, a $orer client, or a (% */create a substantial ofmaterial and ad(erse e)ect on the representation of a client *2 Risk o$ using con&dential in$oration o/tained $ro client to her detrientdisad-antage

*3 $ an iproper /ene&t or ad-antage as a result o$


44/95

P a g e | 44

lia/le $or negligence. +ailure to eHercise reasona/le care, /" not eHplaining clearl"r $ailed to diGerence /etween re$unda/le and non=re$unda/le ad-ice, should ha(ected him to see* $L% and caution about relying on oral promiseaw"ers ust ad-ise to conCicts o$ o$ interest as the" as the" /ecoe known

4or< v. St. 6ierre (19!), >1 ".. (/d) &g

Documents

Real Estate Fall 2014 - Rosenblatt (Long Summary)