{"id":7987,"date":"2022-02-07T10:55:56","date_gmt":"2022-02-07T15:55:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/360mediations.com\/en\/?p=7987"},"modified":"2022-02-07T10:56:53","modified_gmt":"2022-02-07T15:56:53","slug":"certificate-of-pending-litigation-granted-on-property-of-a-vendor-trying-to-resile-from-sale-during-a-hot-real-estate-market","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mail.360mediations.com\/en\/certificate-of-pending-litigation-granted-on-property-of-a-vendor-trying-to-resile-from-sale-during-a-hot-real-estate-market\/","title":{"rendered":"Certificate of Pending Litigation Granted on Property of a Vendor Trying to Resile from Sale During a Hot Real Estate Market"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

CERTIFICATE OF PENDING LITIGATION GRANTED ON PROPERTY OF A VENDOR TRYING TO RESILE FROM A SALE DURING A HOT REAL ESTATE MARKET<\/span><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

The court granted a Certificate of Pending Litigation against the Vendor who accepted a \u201cbully-offer\u201d from a Purchaser who wanted to avoid a bidding war during an upcoming \u201coffer date.\u201d\u00a0 A few days after the Vendor accepted the offer, they took the position that the Purchaser was in default because the Purchaser did not tender a certified cheque for the $100,000.00 deposit.\u00a0 The problem for the Vendor, however, was that the Agreement of Purchase and Sale (\u201cAPS\u201d) did not require the Purchaser to tender the deposit through a certified cheque, notwithstanding the many assurances from their real estate agent that any deposit they received would be backed by a certified cheque. \u00a0A classic case of where the \u201crepresentations\u201d made by the agent were not ultimately codified in the wording of the APS.<\/p>\n

As such, on the face it did not appear to the motion\u2019s judge that the Purchaser was in any default, and hence there was a good argument that the Purchasers were entitled to have the APS honoured.<\/p>\n

The test for the court thereafter was whether the equities of the case warranted the title to the subject property being encumbered while the case remained ongoing.\u00a0 Based on historical case law, the court highlighted the various factors taken into account when making such a decision, none of which in isolation is determinative, as follows:<\/p>\n