Monica Neeraj Goyal

The plaintiffs brought a partial summary judgment motion seeking declarations that a trust agreement was valid and binding, and that they each owned a 20% interest in a property.

In the alternative, they sought leave to register a certificate of pending litigation.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that there were genuine issues requiring a trial, particularly concerning the credibility of witnesses and allegations of fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation regarding the trust agreement.

The court emphasized that such serious credibility issues could not be resolved on a paper record or through fact-finding tools on a motion.

The alternative request for a certificate of pending litigation was also dismissed, as the property was acquired as an investment, damages were an adequate remedy, and the balance of convenience favoured the defendant.

The plaintiff lender brought a motion for summary judgment to recover funds advanced under a mortgage secured against commercial property.

The defendants argued they did not understand the transaction and asserted additional undocumented cash payments and disputes regarding credits for merchandise.

The court found the documentary record clear that $1,200,000 had been advanced with independent legal advice and that the mortgage was properly registered.

Summary judgment was granted for the principal amount with contractual prejudgment interest, and a writ of possession was ordered.

Two discrete issues relating to the value of merchandise credited against the mortgage and the amount of documented cash interest payments were referred to a summary trial.