Non-refundable Deposit Claim Dismissed by Civil Resolution Tribunal
📌 In brief
In a dispute over a non-refundable deposit, the Civil Resolution Tribunal ruled that the buyer forfeited the deposit when they decided not to go through with the purchase. The Tribunal found that the deposit was non-refundable and that the seller was not obligated to return it.
⚖️ Legal holding
A buyer who repudiates a contract forfeits a non-refundable deposit.
📚 Full judgment
The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The deposit was intended to show the buyer was serious and to hold the item until she sold her home.
- The parties agreed the deposit was non-refundable, meaning no refund if the buyer walked away.
- The respondents clarified the item's model year before the applicant agreed to purchase it.
- The respondents did not demand an additional $1,000 but offered to transfer their contract for that amount.
- The respondents' messages about the item's availability did not show an intent to break the agreement.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The correspondence did not support the applicant's argument that outdoor furniture was included in the sale.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the seller must return a non-refundable deposit after the buyer decided not to proceed with the purchase.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the deposit was non-refundable and that the buyer forfeited the deposit when they decided not to proceed with the purchase.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were cited in the decision.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the deposit was non-refundable and that the buyer forfeited the deposit when they decided not to proceed with the purchase.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For someone in a similar situation, if they have paid a non-refundable deposit and decide not to proceed with the purchase, they are unlikely to receive a refund.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify which evidence or documents were considered important.