Background: The dispute involved the interpretation of two contracts for the sale of the Orkney Property: the first with buyers under the Perry Contract, and the second, a back-up offer with Jiaqi Wu under the Wu Contract. Wu alleged the buyers misrepresented their contract to avoid the invocation of a 48-Hour Notice clause, inducing the sellers to breach the Wu Contract.

Legal Arguments/Issues:

• Wu argued the buyers did not have a bona fide contract and the sellers were obligated to sell the property to her.
• The chambers judge removed the CPL based on hardship and inconvenience to the sellers and concluded Wu did not have a viable claim to an interest in the land.
• The respondents contended the appeal was devoid of merit, focusing on the conditions and timelines in the contracts.

Analysis: Justice Harris granted the extension to serve the notice of appeal, stating that Wu showed a bona fide intention to appeal and that no prejudice would result from the delay. The key issue was whether the appeal had merit. It was concluded that the appeal was not clearly without merit, and therefore, it was in the interest of justice to grant the extension.

Disposition: The application for an extension of time to serve the notice of appeal was granted, with service required within two business days of the judgment. There were no specific costs or awards mentioned in favor of either party.