In the case Shirzad v. Hussain et al., 2024 ONSC 5172, the plaintiff, Farhad Shirzad, sought a default judgment after the defendants, Nariesa Hussain and Amernauth Punu, failed to complete the purchase of a property as per their agreement. The defendants moved to set aside the noting of default, which had been entered on September 6, 2022.

Key points:

• Purchase Agreement: The defendants agreed to buy a property for $2,275,000 with a $100,000 deposit due within 24 hours. They failed to pay the deposit and did not complete the purchase.
• Legal Actions: The plaintiff sold the property at a loss and sued for damages. The defendants were noted in default when they did not respond to the statement of claim.
• Defendants’ Motion: The defendants claimed improper service of the claim and sought to set aside the default, citing a delay in being informed about the claim due to personal circumstances.
• Court Decision: The court ruled that the service was valid and dismissed the defendants’ motion, finding no sufficient reason to set aside the default. The total monetary award for costs was $7,510.42, awarded to the plaintiff.

The court emphasized that the defendants had ample opportunity to defend but delayed their actions, and the plaintiff was justified in seeking default judgment.