Author: Nick Tenev

The Setup: A Private Deal Gone Wrong In Afshari v. Privitera, 2025 ONSC 5758, Justice MacNeil tackled a question that should interest every real estate lawyer: can a brokerage be held liable for a realtor’s conduct after the listing agreement has been cancelled? The facts present a cautionary tale. Panthea Afshari, herself a licensed real estate broker associated with Royal LePage, listed her residential property on Lloyminn Avenue for sale and lease on February 2, 2024. Less than two weeks later, on February 13, 2024, she cancelled both listings at 11:40 a.m., with her broker of record signing off at…

In receivership sales, conventional wisdom suggests that once a receiver has accepted an offer subject to court approval, other buyers have missed their chance. The recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Cameron Stephens Mortgage Capital Ltd. v. Conacher Kingston Holdings Inc., 2025 ONCA 732, challenges this assumption and offers crucial guidance for transactional lawyers whose clients may be involved in court-supervised sales. The Facts TDB Restructuring Limited was appointed as receiver over a series of properties on Islington Avenue (the “Property”) following default on a $15.6 million mortgage. After an eight-month marketing process involving approximately 3,000 potential buyers, the…

Private lenders take note: the Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that a borrower’s signature alone on a mortgage commitment letter can create an enforceable mortgage obligation, even when the lender never signs the document. In Patel v. 2811230 Ontario Ltd., 2025 ONCA 679, the Court dismissed an appeal that hinged on this very argument, providing important guidance on contract formation in private lending scenarios. The Transaction Gone Wrong Jay Patel advanced $392,000 to 2811230 Ontario Ltd. secured by a first mortgage on a Niagara Falls investment property. Both parties were represented by counsel throughout. The borrower signed and initialed…

Home inspections are a cornerstone of residential real estate transactions, providing buyers with crucial information about a property’s condition before they commit to purchase. But what happens when an inspector’s report falls short? A recent Ontario Superior Court decision offers important guidance for transactional real estate lawyers advising clients through the purchase process. The Facts In Miller Desjardins v. JF Lajoie Construction Inc., 2025 ONSC 2522, homebuyers Monique Miller and Michel Desjardins sued home inspector Jacques Lajoie after discovering significant defects in their Alexandria property shortly after closing. The plaintiffs had made their purchase conditional on a satisfactory inspection, and…

In Farid v. Brunt, 2025 ONSC 2117, Justice Fraser delivered a comprehensive decision that serves as both a reminder of the high evidentiary bar in solicitor negligence cases and a cautionary tale about the limits of damages when a real estate transaction fails to close. For transactional real estate lawyers, this case offers valuable insights into what can go wrong when closing day arrives, and what your clients can (and cannot) recover if things fall apart. This was a rather odd case with a self-represented plaintiff making claims for damages that the judge found would have been largely untenable even…

The Ontario Superior Court’s recent decision in Daniel v. Rizzo et al., 2025 ONSC 2400, serves as a stark reminder that partition and sale applications under the Partition Act can become unnecessarily costly when parties fail to acknowledge clear legal entitlements. This costs decision, released by Justice Sheard on April 17, 2025, offers valuable lessons for transactional real estate lawyers about the importance of proper risk assessment and realistic advice when co-ownership relationships deteriorate. The Background Tara-Lee Daniel and Michael Angelo Rizzo co-owned two properties: a home in Niagara Falls and a cottage in Trent Lakes, Ontario. When their relationship…

The Ontario Superior Court’s recent decision in 2642948 Ontario Inc. v. Jonny’s Antiques Ltd., 2025 ONSC 2059, provides valuable guidance on a number of issues, and in particular a mortgagee’s self-help remedies following default; and that the borrower cannot rely on mortgage payment modifications unless they are documented in writing. For transactional real estate lawyers, this case serves as a cautionary tale about informal payment arrangements and a practical primer on the “peaceable possession” requirement when exercising power of sale. The Deal That Went Sideways In 2018, the parties structured a share purchase transaction with vendor take-back financing: an 11-month…

Murray-Leung et al. v. Dyck et al., 2025 ONSC 2071 In a decision that underscores the importance of historical property use and the doctrine of prescriptive easements, Justice MacNeil of the Ontario Superior Court has granted neighbouring property owners critical access rights over a disputed driveway. These rights were never formally negotiated or registered, but earned through decades of continuous use. The Dispute Louise and Leslie Murray-Leung own 58 Garner Road West in Hamilton, a landlocked property situated behind 56 Garner Road West, owned by Brian Dyck and Jodi Eastwood. The only access to the Murray-Leungs’ property is via a…

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,…