F.T. Developments Ltd. v. Sherman et al.

F.T. Developments Ltd. v. Sherman et al.

Concurrent findings of fact established no oral waiver or extension; the condition was expressly conditional on municipal rezoning and could not be unilaterally waived by the purchaser under the circumstances; no representation existed to found an estoppel; accordingly specific performance was refused and the appeal dismissed.

Citation
[1969] SCR 203
Parties
Appellant: F.T. Developments Limited; Respondent: Harry M. Sherman; Respondent: John J. Shulman; Respondent: E. Michael Lewin
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 October 1968
Procedural Posture
Appeal Concerning Specific Performance of a Real Property Sale Contract / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Conditions Precedent, Waiver, Estoppel, Rezoning, Vendor and Purchaser
Source Language
English
Property Law Contract Law Equity Real Property Specific Performance Conditions Precedent Waiver Estoppel +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F.T. Developments Limited

Appellant

Harry M. Sherman

Respondent

John J. Shulman

Respondent

E. Michael Lewin

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Concerning Specific Performance of a Real Property Sale Contract / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an oral agreement waiving the rezoning condition
  2. 2 Whether the purchaser could unilaterally waive a condition dependent on a third party (municipal rezoning)
  3. 3 Whether an estoppel could be established against the vendors

Ratio Decidendi

Concurrent findings of fact established no oral waiver or extension; the condition was expressly conditional on municipal rezoning and could not be unilaterally waived by the purchaser under the circumstances; no representation existed to found an estoppel; accordingly specific performance was refused and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Order refusing specific performance