Kosicki v. Toronto (City), 2025 SCC 28 In a landmark case, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that municipal parkland can be acquired through adverse possession where statutory requirements are met. The Court rejected arguments that judges should create common law immunities for such lands, holding that only the legislature can exempt categories of public land from adverse possession. This decision has important implications for title searches, due diligence, and risk assessment when dealing with properties adjacent to municipal parks. Background In 2017, Pawel Kosicki and Megan Munro purchased a residential property in Toronto backing onto Étienne Brûlé Park.…

Real estate practitioners should take note of a recent Ontario Superior Court decision that underscores the stringent disclosure obligations required when obtaining a certificate of pending litigation (CPL) without notice. In 4291425 Canada Inc. v. Scot-Smith et al, Justice Kaufman discharged a CPL that had been registered against a residential property for nearly eight years, finding that the plaintiff failed to provide full and frank disclosure when initially obtaining the order. Background The case arose from a business dispute involving a private medical clinic, which was owned and operated by the plaintiff, an investment holding company, and its business partner,…

Real estate lawyers who draft mortgage documents should take note of a recent Ontario Superior Court decision that provides important guidance on what fees and charges can be imposed on borrowers in default. In TMSSD Inc. v. Ojeikere, 2025 ONSC 5245, Justice Kurz granted summary judgment to a mortgage lender but significantly reduced the additional charges claimed under the mortgage, finding that several violated section 8 of the Interest Act. Background The case involved a straightforward mortgage default scenario. In January 2025, the plaintiff advanced $120,000 to the defendant, secured by an interest-only second mortgage on property in Mississauga. The…

Tillger v. Figliano, 2025 ONSC 4990, offers transactional real estate lawyers important insights into the risks that arise when family members transfer substantial funds without proper documentation, particularly when those funds are used to purchase real property. This decision underscores the critical importance of clear written agreements and serves as a cautionary tale about the presumption of resulting trust. Background Stephanie Tillger sued her younger brother, Christopher Figliano, seeking to recover $500,000 (net of a partial repayment). She claimed she had loaned him $700,000 in May 2018, which he used to purchase a home following his marital separation. The defendant…

Understanding Seller Warranties and the Timing of Disclosure Obligations The Ontario Superior Court’s recent decision in Coppendale v. Mills, 2025 ONSC 5192, provides important guidance for transactional real estate lawyers about the interpretation of standard warranty clauses in agreements of purchase and sale. This case serves as a stark reminder that the precise wording of these clauses matters and that assumptions about their operation can prove costly for buyers and sellers alike. The Facts Adam and Tracey Mills listed their 1958-built Hamilton home for $1,089,000 in May 2023. After viewing the property, prospective buyers Cole Coppendale and Jordanna Cvitkovic noticed…

Osajie v. Alile, 2025 ONSC 1209, offers transactional real estate lawyers valuable insights into how Ontario courts handle failed purchase transactions, misrepresentation claims, and the importance of well-drafted contractual protections. This summary judgment decision demonstrates how proper documentation and clear contractual language can protect vendors when buyers attempt to rescind agreements based on dubious claims. Case Background The case involved a straightforward real estate transaction gone wrong. Benny and Joy Osajie (vendors) entered into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale (APS) with Eevine Alile (purchaser) for $960,000. When the defendant refused to close, the vendors brought a summary judgment motion…

Nedaneg Financial Corporation v. Talebzadeh, 2025 ONSC 848, offers important guidance for real estate lawyers on when courts will grant certificates of pending litigation (CPLs) in cases involving alleged fraudulent conveyances. The decision highlights how judges must balance traditional equitable factors against evidence of schemes to defeat creditors. Background: A Pattern of Strategic Asset Placement Following a mortgage default on a Toronto property, Nedaneg Financial Corporation obtained a consent judgment against Pedram Talebzadeh for approximately $3.7 million. After commencing power of sale proceedings, a shortfall of $536,807 remained. What happened next illustrates a common creditor avoidance strategy that real estate…

Madison Homes Cornell Rouge Limited v. Jia Lin Huang and Pingkai Wu, 2025 ONSC 657, serves as a stark reminder of the risks inherent in preconstruction home purchases and the limited grounds available to buyers seeking to escape their contractual obligations. For transactional real estate lawyers, this decision reinforces several key principles while highlighting common pitfalls that can ensnare unwary purchasers. The Facts: A $1.6 Million Mistake The case involved a preconstruction purchase of a $1,559,000 home in Madison Homes’ Cornell Rouge development. The purchasers, Jia Lin Huang and her mother Pingkai Wu, signed the agreement of purchase and sale…

Kelian v. Trafford, 2025 ONSC 734, serves as a crucial reminder for real estate practitioners about the importance of proper easement documentation and the risks that arise when property rights remain unclear. This recent Ontario Superior Court decision demonstrates how seemingly settled arrangements can unravel when properties change hands, leaving new owners exposed to significant liability. The Facts Vatcho Kelian owned a property in Gorrie, Ontario, with multiple residential buildings served by a septic system located underneath his neighbor Paul Trafford’s property. When the aging septic system failed and was permanently decommissioned, Kelian sought a court order requiring Trafford to…

Mari v. Sanjer, 2025 ONSC 1787 As transactional real estate lawyers, we draft agreements anticipating smooth closings. But what happens when your client agrees to reduce the purchase price to help a struggling buyer, only to have the deal fall through anyway? The recent Ontario Superior Court decision in Mari v. Sanjer offers important lessons about contract amendments, consideration, and the duty to mitigate in failed real estate transactions. The Facts In February 2022, the defendants agreed to purchase the plaintiff’s Hamilton property for $1,450,000, with a $100,000 deposit and an August 15, 2022 closing date. By August, the real…