• Background:

  • In March 2022, Ajibola agreed to purchase a condominium unit (Unit 303) from Upper Vista for $1,249,900.
  • Ajibola paid $197,485 in deposits but did not close the purchase by the March 21, 2024 deadline.
  • Ajibola later alleged that the unit was misrepresented as a new pre-construction, while it was a model suite in use since 2020.

• Claims:

  • Applicant: Sought to terminate the Agreement, claim the $197,485 deposit as forfeited, and resell the unit.
  • Respondent: Alleged misrepresentation and sought return of the deposit.

• Key Legal Issues:

  1. Did Ajibola breach the purchase agreement by not closing?
  2. Did Upper Vista fail to disclose the property’s status as a model suite?
  3. Should the deposit be forfeited?

• Ruling:

  • The court found Ajibola in breach for failing to close and noted he raised the misrepresentation issue too late (over a year after discovering the facts).
  • The deposit of $197,485 was forfeited to Upper Vista.
  • Owens Wright LLP was ordered to release the deposit funds to Upper Vista.

This case centered on contract obligations and real estate disclosure issues.