Legal Blog

Specific Performance

Gillespie v. 1766998 Ontario Inc. 2014 Ont SCJ

Vendor backed out of sale of farmland/residential/commercial property for no good reason. Purchasers sued for specific performance. Judge had to be satisfied that a) Property was unique (both subjectively and objectively) and that no substitute was readily available; (b) damages would be comparatively inadequate to do justice; and (c) the purchasers had established that, from the start, they had a fair, real, and substantial justification to claim specific performance and not be required to purchase a replacement property to mitigate their damages. Because of the nature of the property, the judge held that the property was unique both subjectively and objectively and that the claim for specific performance was reasonable. He also held that, since the property had not increased much in value, an award of damages to the purchasers would be minimal, enabling the vendors to back out of the transaction without any real loss. The judge granted specific performance.

Written by Jonathan Speigel Jonathan Speigel, the founding partner of Speigel Nichols Fox LLP, leads the litigation and construction practices.