Would you hold up a payment of over $1,000,000 for 49 square meters? Go figure eh!

In the recent reported Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick case of MacLean Sports, et al v. City of Fredericton, 2015 NBQB 119 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/gjmq1>, Madame Justice Judy Glendenning reviewed the legal submissions of the parties and based on the materials and the representations of counsel, decided that the parties had not reached a meeting of the minds with respect to the subject matter of the settlement.

The background of this litigation arose out of an expropriation of land by the City of Fredericton of lands owned by MacLean Sports and MacLean Sports did not agree with the amount originally offered by the expropriating party back in 2007. The parties purported to settle the matter by the City of Fredericton agreeing to pay MacLean Sports a sum of money in excess of $1,200,000.00 plus the conveyance of remnant parcel of land owned by the City of Fredericton. When it came time to close the settlement transaction, a dispute between the parties had arisen with respect to the size of the remnant parcel of land which The City of Fredericton was to have granted and conveyed to MacLean Sports on closing.  According to MacLean Sports, the discrepancy lay in the shortage of approximately 49 square meters ( or for you non-metric readers, 525 square feet), and MacLean Sports refused to close the settlement transaction unless the City of Fredericton agreed to pay compensation for the missing 49 square meters. 

Using my rough calculations of what I consider to be the fair  market value (FMV) of the subject property, I would opine the  49 square meters had a FMV of approximately $15,000 - $20,000.00 (*** This is by no means a professional FMV opinion and I disclaim and relinquish any liability resulting from same being provided***).

One has to pose the question why this matter (involving approximately $15,000 - $20,000 ) would have found its way  before a Court of Queen's Bench Judge for dispute resolution. Without knowing the complete details of the case  and only basing my views on what was written by Madame Justice Judy Glendenning in her decision, the legal fees spent by the parties in pursuing this matter before the Courts are likely to approach and possibly exceed the monetary amount actually in dispute.

This case is an eye opener for me and I strongly recommend the reader look at this decision [ MacLean Sports, et al v. City of Fredericton, 2015 NBQB 119 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/gjmq1> ] in order to see for themselves what transpired between the parties and whether they would have handled it differently if they were counsel for one or the other of the parties thereto. 

Obviously, had the formal survey plan of the subject remnant parcel been finalized on or prior to the settlement, this dispute would not have arisen. Could you have wordsmithed and better described the remnant parcel in the settlement agreement without the benefit of a plan?