·  Case Overview: This case involves a dispute over a failed real estate transaction. The plaintiff, Adam Provis, was the intended vendor, while the defendants, Ramadhani Makele and Tantine Mkombozi, were the intended purchasers of a condominium. The defendants could not close the deal, leading to the current litigation.

·  Key Issues:

• The plaintiff seeks to validate the service of the statement of claim, extend the time for service, and strike out the defendants' limitation period defense.
• The defendants argue that the delay in service prejudices them by making their counterclaims and potential third-party claims time-barred and allege the loss of documentary evidence.

·  Court's Decision:

• Extension of Time: Granted. The court extended the time to serve the statement of claim nunc pro tunc to October 27, 2023, finding no evidence of prejudice caused by the delay.
• Striking the Defense: The court struck paragraphs 13-16 of the defendants' statement of defense and counterclaim, ruling that they disclosed no reasonable defense regarding the limitation period.

·  Rationale:

• The plaintiff demonstrated reasonable efforts to serve the claim within the required timeframe, including attempts to contact the defendants and their representatives.
• The court found that the delay was justified given the circumstances and that no significant prejudice to the defendants was evident.

·  Conclusion: The court validated the service of the statement of claim, extended the time for service, and struck the defendants' limitation period defense.

No monetary award was specified in the decision.