The appellant mortgagee appealed an order staying its action against one corporate respondent after a foreclosure action had been converted to one for judicial sale.
The court held that the consent order arising from the negotiations was clear and unequivocal, and did not result from mistaken intentions or a failure to reflect the parties' agreement.
The appellant knew it had to choose which defendant would be the subject of judgment and that consequences flowed from that choice.
By signing judgment against another defendant, the appellant's right to recover against the respondent corporation was terminated by s. 20(3) of the Mortgages Act.
The appeal was dismissed with costs.
