Law360 Canada ( October 22, 2025, 10:46 AM EDT) -- Appeal by Anderson Square Holdings Ltd. (Anderson Square) from trial judge’s decision for breach of contract. This appeal arose out of the interpretation of the termination provisions of certain presale contracts in a strata development in Richmond (the Development). A key issue at trial was whether the presale contracts terminated automatically, on notice being given, if the outside completion date could not be met (unless that date was extended by agreement), or whether the outside completion date was automatically extended for a time and the contract remained in effect. The judge concluded that the contract did not automatically terminate on notice and awarded damages against Anderson Square. On appeal, Anderson Square alleged that the judge erred in his interpretation of the termination provisions by concluding that the outside completion date could be extended under the relevant clauses (clause 2 and clause 21) without the written agreement of the parties. It contended that the presale contracts terminated automatically on notice being given when the outside completion date could not be met. Alternatively, Anderson Square contended that the judge erred in his finding of dishonesty, departing from the rule that damages were assessed at the date of the asserted breach, concluding that the plaintiffs had no obligation to mitigate their damages, and in relying on an unqualified expert for an opinion on value....