Absurd Result if Court's Interpretation AppliedHo v. The Queen, 2015 TCC 10 (CanLII)
For a summary of the decision, see HERE
The Court's interpretation of the final condition, as it applies to a group of individuals, however, leads to what may be considered an absurd result. If, for example, two persons purchased the unit with the initial intention to use it as their primary residence, but then only one of them after substantial completion actually does or continues to so occupy the unit, the group would be ineligible. However, if neither of the persons occupy the unit or intend to occupy the unit after substantial completion, but a mutual relative of them both does occupy the unit, then the group would be eligible for the rebate.