How has the court interpreted the doctrine of misrepresentation in the context of square footage in real estate transactions?

In Issa v. Wilson, 2019 ONSC 6744, the trial judge found that the purchaser’s expectations with respect to the size of the home were determined by misrepresentations of the square footage, and not by his inspection of the home. On appeal, Issa v. Wilson, 2020 ONCA 756, the vendors argued that the trial judge had erred by not accepting the proposition that where purchasers inspect a property, their reliance on a misrepresentation as to the size of the property will be displaced. The court held, at paras. 10-11, that the proper determination of this issue will depend upon the factual context: The appellants submit that the trial judge erred by not accepting the proposition that where a purchaser inspects a property their reliance on a misrepresentation as to the size of the property will be displaced. We do not accept that this is an absolute proposition of law. In some cases, it has been applied; in other cases it has not governed because of a constellation of facts that would make a strict application unfair in the circumstances.