In Hatami v. 1237144 Ontario Inc.[6] the plaintiff sought return of her deposit on the grounds that the vendor had misrepresented the property as zoned for commercial use when it was not. The court found that it would have been a simple matter to make zoning a part of the condition of the agreement, but that was not done. As such, the court was not in a position to ignore the clear meaning of the existing terms of the agreement.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.