Saint-Fort v. Ashcroft Homes – Eastboro Inc.
Jean Jacquelyn Saint-Fort
Audrey Pierre
Blaise Tongace Traore
Briana Brissette
Fatoumata Diallo
Naji Youssef Zourob
Michel Lebeau
Jeremy Nantel Saint-Fort
Samuel Stewart
Eyr Technologies Inc.
Haissam Balaa
Mounawar Jammal
Abd El Hadi Balaa
Fraz Tabassam
Sheri Boudreau
Lise-Anne Boal
Asjad Mahmood Malik
Moazzam Iqbal
Jean Denis Labrosse
Lise Labrosse
Hanan Talabeh
Samer Mardini
Mushtaq Ahmed Shahid
Fahmida Jahangir
Michel Brissette
Khaled Makkouk
Nooraddin Albaghjati
Muhammad Aamir Shehzad
Sumera Ameer Khan
Ashcroft Homes – Eastboro Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Mann Lawyers LLP
Lawyer(s)

Brett Hodgins

  • ·  Background:

  • Plaintiffs entered into standard form agreements with Ashcroft for the purchase of homes to be built in the Eastboro development. These agreements included a Tarion Addendum that set early termination conditions.
  • Ashcroft added additional early termination conditions in "Schedule U," stating that the agreements were contingent upon the completion of necessary subdivision construction by June 2020.
  • ·  Key Issues:

  • Whether "Condition 2" of Schedule U (requiring completion of subdivision construction sufficient to enable the issuance of a building permit) contradicts the Tarion Addendum.
  • Whether Ashcroft was timely in terminating the agreements based on this condition.
  • Whether Ashcroft breached its contractual obligations by failing to take all commercially reasonable steps to satisfy the conditions.
  • ·  Court Findings:

  • Condition 2 Validity: The court held that Condition 2 of Schedule U is not inconsistent with the Tarion Addendum. It permits a condition related to the completion of hard services, even though the "Approving Authority" was misidentified by Ashcroft.
  • Timeliness of Termination: Ashcroft's termination of the purchase agreements on July 6, 2020, was deemed timely as the condition was interpreted to allow for termination at any point in June 2020.
  • Commercially Reasonable Steps: Ashcroft took all commercially reasonable steps within its power to satisfy the condition, including consistent communication with the City and efforts to advance construction, but faced unavoidable delays.
  • ·  Outcome:
    The action was dismissed. The court found that Ashcroft acted within its rights under the agreements and in accordance with the Tarion Addendum. The plaintiffs' claims were rejected, and costs were awarded to Ashcroft.

Superior Court of Justice - Ontario
CV-20-85354
Corporate & commercial law
Defendant