This appeal concerned the enforceability and priority of a judgment creditor's writ of seizure and sale against a beneficial interest in land held by a bare trustee under an unregistered trust agreement.
The appellant, a judgment creditor of Fortress Wismer (beneficial owner), sought declarations that its writ was binding on Pace Mark (registered owner/bare trustee) and had priority over subsequent advances under a previously registered construction financing charge held by the respondents (Firm Capital and MarshallZehr).
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming that the Execution Act is procedural and does not grant substantive rights to judgment creditors beyond seizing the debtor's interest.
The court held that the writ did not bind the legal owner (Pace Mark) and that actual notice of the writ did not grant priority over prior registered charges under s. 93(4) of the Land Titles Act, as that section does not apply to execution creditors.
