Is a contract to pay rent sufficient consideration to support an option to purchase the same property?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from Matthewson v. Burns, 1913 CanLII 25 (ON CA):
House v. Jackson (1893), 24 Or. 89, is the same kind of a case, and the result is the same: “It has repeatedly been held that in a lease of real property, containing an option to purchase the same, the contract to pay the rent was a sufficient consideration to support the option” (p. 95).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Is a memorandum of intent to purchase a property sufficient to meet the purchase price? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for interpretation of a commercial contract where the contract states that the contract is not a "contract with respect to the context or factual matrix"? (Ontario, Canada)
Is a failure to complaint and promise to pay the next installment of a purchase contract an express affirmation of the contract? (Ontario, Canada)
Is it reasonable to impute income to the support payor for the purposes of child support and retroactive child support? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for a party to a contract where the contract is not binding and the terms of the contract are not binding? (Ontario, Canada)
Can a debt incurred as part of the purchase price of a property be traced to the property? (Ontario, Canada)
Does the term "support order" need to be changed to include "support orders" in the definition of a support order? (Ontario, Canada)
Is a transfer of property to a new partner set aside if the new partner agrees to a transaction which has the effect of avoiding a former spouse's support and property obligations? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the test for an award of interim support in the absence of a marriage contract that waives support? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any case law that supports the argument that the executor of a property was not an executor by the assignment of property? (Ontario, Canada)
