Ontario Real Estate Law Insights

Ontario Real Estate Law Insights Practical case-law insights on Ontario real estate, mortgage, and construction law for lawyers and real estate professionals.

OntarioRealEstateLawInsights.com is the top source for news, case law developments, and practical insights for real estate lawyers in the Province of Ontario, Canada. The website is administered by Cowan Litigation, a top litigation law firm in Toronto, Ontario, that focuses on real estate litigation. Cowan Litigation is the operating name of Northstone Law Professional Corporation.

Not every failed transaction leads to a negligence claim that succeeds.In this case, the buyers sued their lawyer for ne...
05/21/2026

Not every failed transaction leads to a negligence claim that succeeds.

In this case, the buyers sued their lawyer for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty after a residential deal did not close. The court dismissed the claim entirely.

The key point: liability depends on evidence of an actual breach of the standard of care—not simply the fact that the deal fell apart.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is clear: clear instructions, proper documentation, and adherence to standard practice matter. Without proof of a breach, negligence claims will not succeed.

Watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/wDKmzQohz_A

Subscribe for more case-law insights: https://ontariorealestatelawinsights.com/

Subscribe to the Ontario Real Estate Law Insights newsletter for timely, case-law-based insights built specifically for Ontario real estate practitioners.In ...

In Ontario real estate, the courts do not decide cases based on sympathy.When a buyer fails to close, the deposit is gen...
05/19/2026

In Ontario real estate, the courts do not decide cases based on sympathy.

When a buyer fails to close, the deposit is generally forfeited—even if the reason is financial difficulty or personal hardship. Courts consistently treat deposits as security for performance, not something that can be recovered simply because the outcome feels unfair.

Relief from forfeiture is possible, but it is rare and requires exceptional circumstances, such as clear unconscionability or a deposit that is grossly disproportionate to the seller’s loss.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is direct: clients need to understand the risk before signing. Once the deal is firm, hardship alone is unlikely to protect the deposit.

Read the full analysis:
https://ontariorealestatelawinsights.com/no-compassion-in-real-estate-contracts-pleading-hardship-wont-save-your-deposit/

Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Hussain v. Reid’s Heritage Homes Ltd., 2026 ONSC 710 A recent Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision serves as a timely reminder that a buyer’s personal hardship, even a documented and serious mental health condition, will not, on its own, entitle that b...

In real estate contracts, wording determines outcome.In this case, the parties believed the deal had been terminated—but...
05/17/2026

In real estate contracts, wording determines outcome.

In this case, the parties believed the deal had been terminated—but the court disagreed. The phrase “will terminate” was treated as future intent, not an effective termination of the Agreement of Purchase and Sale.

The result: the contract remained in force.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is direct: termination must be clear, immediate, and unequivocal. Anything less can leave the agreement alive—and expose clients to risk.

Watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/kbfypJliQ2M

1 like. "Court Ruling 'Terminate' Suggests More Steps, Not Actual Termination"

You can’t ignore zoning and then rely on it later.In this case, the buyer attempted to shift responsibility to the listi...
05/15/2026

You can’t ignore zoning and then rely on it later.

In this case, the buyer attempted to shift responsibility to the listing—but the court found that the buyer was aware of the zoning and proceeded anyway. That knowledge was enough to defeat the claim.

The decision reinforces a consistent principle: buyers cannot rely on information they already knew (or should have verified) to avoid a transaction. Due diligence matters, especially where zoning impacts intended use.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is clear: zoning risk sits with the buyer unless clearly addressed in the agreement. If the issue is known before closing, it will be difficult to rely on it later as a basis for relief.

Read the full analysis:
https://ontariorealestatelawinsights.com/dont-blame-the-listing-buyer-knew-the-zoning-court-finds/

Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Mino et al. v. Foster et al., 2026 ONSC 838 | Ontario Superior Court of Justice | February 23, 2026 Introduction A recent Ontario Superior Court decision offers a timely reminder for transactional real estate lawyers: an incorrect MLS listing is not a blank cheq...

When co-owners can no longer work together, the legal path is often predictable.In Daniel v. Rizzo, former partners join...
05/13/2026

When co-owners can no longer work together, the legal path is often predictable.

In Daniel v. Rizzo, former partners jointly owned two properties and could not agree on how to proceed. The court applied the Partition Act, which generally supports a forced sale to resolve the dispute.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is clear: co-owners have a strong right to sale, and it is difficult to resist. Prolonged disputes often lead to increased costs with little chance of avoiding that outcome.

Watch the short: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/y-rWVsBT9PM

4 likes, 1 comment. "Daniel vs Rizzo: Property Battle in Ontario Court"

Not every missing or unclear term will invalidate a real estate agreement.In this case, the court confirmed that incompl...
05/11/2026

Not every missing or unclear term will invalidate a real estate agreement.

In this case, the court confirmed that incomplete terms do not automatically mean there is no deal. The key question is whether the essential elements of the contract are sufficiently clear and whether the parties intended to be bound.

Courts will look at the overall agreement and the conduct of the parties, not just isolated gaps or imperfections, when determining enforceability.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is clear: do not assume a deal fails because terms are incomplete. If the core elements are present, the agreement may still be enforceable—creating real legal exposure.

Read the full analysis:
https://ontariorealestatelawinsights.com/incomplete-terms-dont-always-mean-no-deal/

Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Ontario Court of Appeal | February 13, 2026 | 2026 ONCA 106 For transactional real estate lawyers, the story in Wright v. Wright is a familiar one: a family arrangement, a property with rising value, and a handshake deal that eventually needed paper behind it. W...

In real estate litigation, the size of a damages claim does not determine its validity.In this case, buyers sought $4.8 ...
05/09/2026

In real estate litigation, the size of a damages claim does not determine its validity.

In this case, buyers sought $4.8 million in damages tied to a failed closing—despite the property being worth $281,000.

The issue was not the number, but how the damages were framed. Courts require claims to be grounded in recognized legal principles and supported by evidence—not speculation or disproportionate theories of loss.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is clear: analyze damages claims carefully. Large numbers alone do not create legal entitlement.

Watch the video:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/dZY9XQ_S8eY

Subscribe for more case-law insights:
https://ontariorealestatelawinsights.com/

7 likes. "Lawyer Sued for $4 8M Over $281K Property Deal!"

Long-term use of land does not automatically create legal rights—but in some cases, it can.This case examines whether pr...
05/07/2026

Long-term use of land does not automatically create legal rights—but in some cases, it can.

This case examines whether proprietary estoppel can be used as an alternative where a claim for adverse possession is not available. The court focused on whether there was a clear representation, reliance, and resulting detriment—the core elements required to establish proprietary estoppel.

The dispute centered on a driveway and whether continued use, combined with the parties’ conduct, was enough to create enforceable rights over the property.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is clear: informal arrangements can create enforceable expectations. Where parties rely on representations and act to their detriment, courts may intervene—even without formal ownership or possession rights.

Read the full analysis:
https://ontariorealestatelawinsights.com/a-wide-driveway-and-proprietary-estoppel-as-a-substitute-for-adverse-possession/

Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email 9409394 Canada Inc. v. Ghislain Lascelles, 2026 ONSC 819 | Ontario Superior Court of Justice | February 24, 2026   If you act for buyers and sellers of residential or commercial property in Ontario, you may not spend much time thinking about adverse possession ...

In Ontario real estate transactions, time of the essence leaves no margin for error.In this case, the APS required closi...
05/05/2026

In Ontario real estate transactions, time of the essence leaves no margin for error.

In this case, the APS required closing by 5:00 PM. At 5:01 PM, the vendor terminated—and the court upheld that decision.

The takeaway is direct: once the deadline passes, the non-defaulting party may treat the contract as at an end. Even a one-minute delay can carry serious financial consequences.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the message to clients is clear: closing timelines must be met precisely.

Watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rpwzYQU6_4s

Register for the CPD webinar:
https://cowanlitigation.com/free-live-cpd-webinar-failed-mortgage-transactions-recent-developments-may-13/

Deal Dead! Vendor Terminates APS Minutes After Deadline.

A shared driveway turned into a legal battle over property rights and expectations.In this case, the court considered wh...
05/03/2026

A shared driveway turned into a legal battle over property rights and expectations.

In this case, the court considered whether a party could rely on proprietary estoppel to claim rights over land—effectively as a substitute where traditional claims like adverse possession were unavailable.

Proprietary estoppel requires more than long-term use. Courts look for clear representations, reliance, and resulting detriment, along with conduct that would make it unconscionable to deny the claimed right.

The key issue was whether the facts supported those elements—or whether the use of the driveway was simply tolerated without creating legal rights.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is clear: informal arrangements can create real legal risk. Long-term use, improvements, and assumptions about access should be documented, or disputes over ownership and use may follow.

Read the full analysis:
https://ontariorealestatelawinsights.com/a-wide-driveway-and-proprietary-estoppel-as-a-substitute-for-adverse-possession/

Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email 9409394 Canada Inc. v. Ghislain Lascelles, 2026 ONSC 819 | Ontario Superior Court of Justice | February 24, 2026   If you act for buyers and sellers of residential or commercial property in Ontario, you may not spend much time thinking about adverse possession ...

In Ontario real estate transactions, time of the essence means exactly that.The Court of Appeal confirmed that once this...
05/01/2026

In Ontario real estate transactions, time of the essence means exactly that.

The Court of Appeal confirmed that once this clause is engaged, deadlines are strictly enforced—even where the result appears harsh. If the parties agreed to it, the court will uphold it.

For Ontario real estate lawyers, the takeaway is clear: there is no margin for error. Missing a deadline—even by minutes—can lead to termination, loss of deposit, and damages exposure.

Watch the video:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/IOQyWpbG4SA

Register for the CPD webinar:
https://cowanlitigation.com/free-live-cpd-webinar-failed-mortgage-transactions-recent-developments-may-13/

Register for our upcoming CPD-accredited webinar for lawyers here:https://cowanlitigation.com/free-live-cpd-webinar-failed-mortgage-transactions-recent-devel...

Address

100 King Street West Suite 5700
Toronto, ON
M5X1C7

Telephone

+14163863080

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Ontario Real Estate Law Insights posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Ontario Real Estate Law Insights:

Shortcuts

Featured

Share

Category