Where neither party can close a real estate transaction on the date of closing either can pick a reasonable new date and require tender

Where neither party to a real estate transaction is in a position to close at the date set for closing the transaction itself is not thereby voided. Rather, either party can choose a reasonable new date for closing and insist on that as the new date to tender. King v. Urban (1973), 1 O.R. (2d) 449 holds that even where a contract for sale of land provides for time "is of the essence", if neither party is prepared to close on the closing date, the contract continues to exist and either party can pick a new date for closing, "which must be reasonable" (p 456).

Today's decision in 1672370 Ontario Limited v. D. Narducci Holdings Inc., 2010 ONCA 264 reaffirms and applies the decision in King. The Court holds as follows (note, the Court below gives an incorrect citation for King; the correct citation is above. The decision in King is well worth rereading):

[1] The motion judge found that neither party was prepared to close on the date agreed upon in the settlement. ...

[2] As neither party could close, the appellant could not unilaterally terminate as the agreement purported to do in September 2008. The respondent was entitled to fix a new closing date and he did so - October 31, 2008: King v. Urban & Country Transport Ltd. (1973), 1 O.R. (3d) 449 (C.A.).