Garlicky Mediterranean Grill Inc. v. 2715762 Ontario Inc.
The appeal is dismissed because the application judge properly found the appellant’s email did not meet the contractual/formal requirements to exercise the lease renewal option and those mixed fact-and-law findings are entitled to deference; consequently no option was validly exercised and the landlord was not bound...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2025 ONCA 248
- Parties
- Appellant: Garlicky Mediterranean Grill Inc.; Respondent: 2715762 Ontario Inc.
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 2 April 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Collection / Appeal From Superior Court of Justice (oral Reasons)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Lease Renewal, Option to Renew, Exercise of Option, Costs
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Garlicky Mediterranean Grill Inc.
Appellant
2715762 Ontario Inc.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Collection / Appeal From Superior Court of Justice (oral Reasons)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the December 8, 2023 email amounted to a valid exercise of the option to renew the lease
- 2 Whether the application judge's findings of mixed fact and law attract appellate deference
- 3 Whether the landlord was contractually bound to future lease terms absent a valid exercise of the option
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is dismissed because the application judge properly found the appellant’s email did not meet the contractual/formal requirements to exercise the lease renewal option and those mixed fact-and-law findings are entitled to deference; consequently no option was validly exercised and the landlord was not bound to future lease terms.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Costs of the appeal and all prior motions awarded to the respondent on a partial indemnity scale fixed at $12,000 inclusive of disbursements and HST.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Garlicky Mediterranean Grill Inc. v. 2715762 Ontario Inc. Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2025-04-02 Neutral citation 2025 ONCA 248 Docket numbers COA-24-CV-1055 Judges Simmons, Janet M.; Wilson, Darla A.; Madsen, Lene Subject Civil Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: Garlicky Mediterranean Grill Inc. v. 2715762 Ontario Inc., 2025 ONCA 248 DATE: 20250402 DOCKET: COA-24-CV-1055 Simmons, Wilson and Madsen JJ.A. BETWEEN Garlicky Mediterranean Grill Inc. Applicant (Appellant) and 2715762 Ontario Inc. Respondent (Respondent) Shahzad Siddiqui and Osman Ali, for the appellant Eli Bordman and Lindsay Poole, for the respondent Heard and released orally: March 28, 2025 On appeal from the order of Justice Ranjan K. Agarwal of the Superior Court of Justice, dated October 2, 2024. REASONS FOR DECISION [1] The appellant’s main argument on appeal is that the application judge erred in failing to find the email correspondence between the appellant and the landlord amounted to the exercise of the appellants option to renew the lease. [2] The application judge made findings, at paragraphs 32 and 33 of his reasons, that the appellant’s December 8, 2023 email did not meet the formal requirements for the exercise of an option, and that the landlord did not treat it as such. [3] These findings of mixed fact and law are entitled to deference on appeal. We see no extricable error of law on the part of the application judge or any other basis on which to interfere. [4] Given that the appellant did not exercise its option to renew, the landlord was not contractually bound to any future specific lease terms. [5] The appeal is therefore dismissed. [6] The costs of the appeal and all prior motions are awarded to the respondent on a partial indemnity scale fixed in the amount of $12,000 inclusive of disbursements and HST. “Janet Simmons J.A.” “D.A. Wilson J.A.” “L. Madsen J.A.”