Law360 Canada ( August 20, 2026, 9:12 AM EDT) -- Appeal by Lockharts from summary judgment decision concerning entitlement to a deposit following the Gliddens’ wrongful repudiation of an Agreement of Purchase and Sale (APS). The Lockharts listed their home and the Gliddens submitted an offer to purchase. The parties ultimately entered into an APS. The APS provided that the deposit would be credited toward the purchase price on completion and that, if the buyer defaulted in the completion of the sale, any money paid would be forfeited to the seller, or the seller could compel the buyer to complete the sale. The Gliddens raised objections to title based on two encumbrances and refused the Lockharts’ request to extend the closing date. The Lockharts relisted the property and sold it at a lower price, sustaining damages of $18,294. The Lockharts commenced an action seeking a declaration that the deposit was forfeited in their favour and damages. The Gliddens asserted that the APS was null and void because they raised a valid objection that was not resolved before closing and counterclaimed for the return of the deposit. The motion judge found that the Gliddens breached their obligations under the APS and wrongly repudiated the agreement but concluded that the Lockharts were entitled to retain the deposit only to the extent of their proven damages. The Lockharts appealed that determination, abandoning their claim for damages in excess of the deposit and seeking only recovery of the entire deposit. The issues were whether the motion judge erred in her application of the common law of deposits and in her interpretation of the APS....