A developer has a contract to purchase a large parcel of agricultural land in Parkland County for future residential development. The contract includes a condition 'for municipal rezoning to enable residential development, satisfactory to the buyer, by 180 days after acceptance.' This condition is explicitly stated as being for the 'sole benefit of the buyer.' If the rezoning application is delayed beyond 180 days due to municipal processes, but the developer still wishes to proceed, what is the most likely legal outcome?

Question: A developer has a contract to purchase a large parcel of agricultural land in Parkland County for future residential development. The contract includes a condition 'for municipal rezoning to enable residential development, satisfactory to the buyer, by 180 days after acceptance.' This condition is explicitly stated as being for the 'sole benefit of the buyer.' If the rezoning application is delayed beyond 180 days due to municipal processes, but the developer still wishes to proceed, what is the most likely legal outcome?

Answer options:

• The contract is automatically null and void due to the expired condition. ✅ The developer can unilaterally waive the condition and proceed with the purchase.
• Both parties must mutually agree to extend the condition period.
• The seller can terminate the contract as the condition was not met within the timeframe.

Correct answer: The developer can unilaterally waive the condition and proceed with the purchase.

Explanation: When a condition precedent is stated to be 'for the sole benefit of the buyer' (or either party), the party for whose benefit it was inserted typically has the right to waive that condition, even if it has not been met, and proceed with the contract. This principle is fundamental in contract law regarding conditions precedent for a party's exclusive benefit.