The plaintiff, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, brought an ex parte motion for leave to issue a writ of possession for a mortgaged property.
The motion was initially declined due to an occupancy report suggesting the property had been sold.
Upon receiving supplementary evidence confirming the defendants and their adult children still occupied the property and the anticipated sale did not proceed, the court was satisfied that the requirements of Rule 60.10(2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure were met.
The court granted the plaintiff leave to issue the writ of possession.