The moving defendants sought to set aside a noting in default, set aside a default judgment, stay a notice of garnishment, and obtain release of garnished funds in a construction deficiency action involving allegedly improper installation of paving stones.
Applying the Rule 19.03 and Rule 19.08 frameworks, the court found the motion was brought promptly, the defendants had a plausible explanation rooted in their reasonable reliance on an insurer and an erroneous dismissal order, and they had an arguable defence on standing, warranty, and damages.
The prejudice to the defendants from enforcing a judgment exceeding $120,000 outweighed any compensable prejudice to the plaintiff.
The court also held there was no basis to maintain a pre-judgment asset freeze through garnishment in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
