M. Abramowitz

Following a commercial receivership application, the court determined entitlement and quantum of costs.

The moving party had been substantially successful in enforcing its security and was presumptively entitled to costs against the debtor respondents.

Relying on the security agreement, the court held that the contractual provision requiring payment of “solicitor and own client costs” justified an award on a substantial indemnity basis against the corporate debtors and one individual debtor.

However, a separate individual respondent who was not party to the security agreement was ordered to pay costs only on a partial indemnity basis.

Mortgagee respondents who successfully narrowed the scope of the receivership order were ordered to bear their own costs in relation to the issues between them and the applicant.

The plaintiff, an involuntary creditor due to overdrawn accounts, sought the appointment of a receiver over the corporate debtors' receivables and the individual debtors' real property after the debtors defaulted on a demand loan.

The motion was opposed by the debtors and by prior mortgagees who argued the receiver's mandate should not extend to the real property.

The court found it just and convenient to appoint a receiver over both the receivables and the real property to ensure a fair, transparent, and efficient realization process for all creditors, while respecting the mortgagees' priorities.