Anjay Limited v. Hindu Maha Sabha (Mississauga), 2010 ONSC 7224 (S.C.J.) (Rule 20 – summary judgment)
Judgment Released: December 30, 2010 Link to Judgment
The plaintiff chargee moved for summary judgment to, among other things, foreclose the defendant’s equity in the subject property and obtain possession of the property. The Court described the matter as “far from a straightforward commercial relationship”. The Court acknowledged the amendments to Rule 20 but found that the amendments would not provide the Court with jurisdiction to “simply prefer and accept the evidence of the plaintiff”. The defendants alleged the plaintiff had promised not to take certain steps to enforce their rights and the Court acknowledged that the defendants had an “arguable” defence of promissory estoppel. A trial was required to appropriately determine, on additional evidence, what took place between the parties.