In a commercial landlord–tenant dispute concerning a hair salon lease, the tenant moved to amend or vary a prior interlocutory order requiring monthly payments into court toward disputed additional rent arrears.
The action had been set down for trial, raising a question whether leave was required under Rule 48.04 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court held that leave was unnecessary in the circumstances, and alternatively granted leave.
Applying Rule 59.06(1), the court found the earlier order had not adjudicated the scenario where trial would occur after lease termination and amended the order so that the tenant’s $4,000 monthly payments into court terminated on July 31, 2013.
The tenant was awarded $10,000 in costs.
