This was an Application for Summary Judgment pursuant to Rule 7.3 concerning a contractual dispute about the purchase and sale of farmland and related issues. The Court set out the applicable principles for Summary Judgment and noted that the case turned on the interpretation of the agreement at issue (the “Agreement”) which required the Defendant to apply for subdivision of the Northwest Quarter (the “Land”) and sell it to the Plaintiff after subdivision was effected. The Court noted that the Defendant had never applied to subdivide the Land.

The Court found that the language in the Agreement was clear and unambiguous and even if the Agreement were ambiguous it would have come to the same conclusion based on evidence of the Parties’ post-contract conduct. Accordingly, the Court determined that it was able to come to a fair and just determination on the merits.

The Court determined that the legal requirements for granting Summary Judgment in favour of the Plaintiff had been met and granted the remedy of specific performance. The Court did find that the Plaintiff’s claim for loss profits was an insufficient assertion, and accordingly an issue that could not be decided summarily.