The defendant son brought a motion under Rule 45.02 for an order requiring the plaintiff mother to pay into court all rents received from a disputed property, as well as occupancy rent, pending the outcome of her action for a declaration of beneficial ownership.
The court dismissed the motion, finding that anticipated future rental revenues and disputed occupancy rent do not constitute a 'specific fund' within the meaning of the rule.
The court also found that the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiff, who relied on the rental income to pay for the property's utilities and expenses.
