Overview:
In the case of Abbas Mahanloo v. RTMA Enterprises Inc. and Ali Golriz, heard in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, the defendants sought a summary trial to dismiss the plaintiff’s breach of contract claim. The plaintiff, Abbas Mahanloo, alleged that the defendants breached an oral agreement to sell shares in RTMA related to a real estate joint venture. The defendants, RTMA Enterprises Inc. and Ali Golriz, argued that no binding contract was formed due to unmet conditions and disagreement over terms.

Factual Background:
Mahanloo claimed he had an oral agreement to purchase 50% of RTMA’s shares for $250,000, granting him a stake in a joint real estate development. The defendants argued the sale was subject to conditions, including the approval of joint venture partners and further loan extensions, none of which were met. Negotiations were not documented in writing.

Legal Issues:
The main issue was whether a binding oral agreement existed. The court had to determine:

1. Whether the parties reached a consensus on contract terms.
2. If there was a breach of contract.
3. Whether Mahanloo suffered damages due to the breach.

Decision:
The court dismissed the defendants’ application for a summary trial, finding the case unsuitable for summary disposition due to factual disputes and the need for credibility assessments.

Costs:
Each party bore their own costs, as the court found both sides' litigation decisions contributed to the inability to resolve the case summarily.