In order to satisfy the requirements of the lender, the agreement for the purchase by the appellant (Ms. Chen), who was a university student, of a new home added her two godparents (who were not related to her) as named purchasers. LeBlanc JA found that their addition meant that the purchase did not qualify under ss. 254(2)(b) and (c) given that they did not occupy the new home and, in this regard, referred (at para. 13) to Cheema as standing for the proposition that:
The fact that someone was acquiring a new house only as a trustee and with no beneficial interests in the property was of no consequence; there was no exception for trustees (Cheema at paras. 93-95). What mattered at the time … was
“the relationship of the person acquiring the [house] to the builder—one of purchase and sale—[…], not the relationship between co-purchasers”(Cheema at para. 94).
Regarding Ms. Chen’s submission (at para. 12) that “the majority’s reasons were undermined by amendments that were brought to the Act in 2021 [to s. 262(3)], Leblanc JA stated (also at para. 12) that “there is no indication … that the 2021 amendments were made strictly for clarification purposes.”