The appellant obtained a deficiency judgment against the respondents following a mortgage default and power of sale.
Fourteen years later, the appellant brought an application under rules 60.07(2) and 60.08(2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure for leave to issue a writ of seizure and sale and notices of garnishment.
The motion judge dismissed the application due to the appellant's failure to explain the 14-year delay.
On appeal, the Divisional Court upheld the decision, confirming that a judge has discretion to refuse leave solely on the basis of unexplained delay, even if the 20-year limitation period under the Limitations Act has not expired.
