G. Gryguc

The applicant brought an application against the respondents.

The court previously determined that one of the respondents was a party under disability and adjourned the matter pending the appointment of a litigation guardian.

At a subsequent case conference, the court was advised that no litigation guardian had been appointed.

The court ordered that the application remain adjourned sine die until a litigation guardian is appointed, and scheduled a further case conference.

The applicant law firm brought an application under the Solicitors Act to approve a retainer agreement with the respondent.

The respondent argued she lacked the mental capacity to enter into the agreement.

The Public Guardian and Trustee and other respondents argued the application should be stayed as the respondent was a party under disability requiring a litigation guardian.

The court found the respondent was a party under disability pursuant to Rule 7.01(1) and adjourned the application sine die until a litigation guardian is appointed or medical evidence confirms her capacity to instruct counsel.

Mortgagees moved for judgment for the outstanding balance remaining after a mortgaged property was sold and creditors paid.

The only remaining issue concerned the final calculation of the mortgage debt after construction liens registered against the property were discharged.

The responding mortgagor, through newly retained counsel, challenged the mortgage calculations but provided no alternative figures and raised concerns about discrepancies in earlier accounting and a potential conflict involving the lender’s counsel.

The court found the plaintiffs’ sworn accounting reliable and concluded the objections amounted to delay tactics.

Judgment was granted for the outstanding mortgage balance together with contractual post‑judgment interest.