In Jones v. Quinn (Ont CA, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal considers the law of specific performance:
[83] The appellant characterizes the application judge’s order as impermissibly fashioning an agreement for the parties. But that is not how I read her order. I understand the order as requiring the specific performance of a contract arising out of the exercise of the option, which the parties freely entered into. The parties agreed to a contract to sell a property, via the execution of an option. The appellant breached, and the application judge ordered them to follow through with their commitment and complete the conveyance of the Property.
[84] I acknowledge that the application judge did not conduct a formal specific performance analysis in her reasons. However, I have no hesitation in concluding that specific performance was an available remedy in this case, given that the Property was of unique significance to Ms. Jones: see generally Erie Sand and Gravel Limited v. Tri-B Acres Inc, 2009 ONCA 709, 97 O.R. (3d) 241, at para. 117.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
