After a seven day trial, the trial judge found that while there had been discussion between the parties about modification of the terms of the contract of purchase and sale, no binding oral agreement was ever concluded. At best, he found the parties had “an agreement to agree” to modify the terms of the written contract. The trial judge refused to grant relief from forfeiture and ordered the Bartas to vacate the Property within 60 days of his (March 29, 2012) reasons for judgment: Palkovics v. Barta, 2012 BCSC 399. The Bartas are still in possession of the Property and seek a stay of proceedings in order to permit them to retain possession while they prosecute their appeal. Background facts
"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.