THE ADVOCATE 57
VOL. 80 PART 1 JANUARY 2022
which said that “REDMA balances the rigour of the
disclosure regime as a consumer protection measure
against the flexibility in giving the developer an open
opportunity to amend the disclosure Statement as
often as it is necessary to adjust to unforeseen circumstances”
26. As described in s 21(3.2), some failures to provide
disclosure will not trigger a purchaser’s right to
rescind. Failures to deliver phase disclosure statements
under s 15.1(4) or consolidated disclosure
statements under s 15.2(4) do not trigger a purchaser’s
right to rescind.
27. Under s 21(3.2)(b), the amendment must relate to a
material fact at the earlier of the date notice of rescission
is provided or the date on which the purchase
agreement requires the developer to transfer title.
28. The decision in Chameleon, supra note 13 illustrates
this point. The purchaser contracted for a penthouse
in a resort community, but then suffered financial setbacks.
The developer adduced evidence that the purchaser
was motivated to seek rescission due to
financial trouble, but the Court of Appeal did not
take the purchaser’s motive into consideration. The
Court of Appeal in 299 Burrard, supra note 20 at
para 21 approvingly cited Chameleon on this point.
29. Chameleon, supra note 13 at para 12.
30. Supra note 20.
31. Ibid at para 25.
32. 2011 BCSC 505.
33. See Pinto (BCSC), supra note 8 at paras 21, 30.