Matthew R. Todd

The respondent and a second mortgagee advanced funds to a mortgagor, but their mortgages were registered in the wrong order due to a solicitor's error.

The appellant, a third mortgagee, learned of the error and subsequently purchased an assignment of the mistakenly first-registered mortgage at a discount, claiming priority over the respondent.

The application judge found the appellant had actual notice of the true priority before acquiring the assignment, defeating its claim.

The Court of Appeal upheld this finding and dismissed the appeal.

The appellant appealed a trial judgment finding it owed the respondent $22,987.50 based on unpaid invoices.

The appellant conceded the amount was owed and did not appeal the dismissal of its counterclaim.

The Court of Appeal held that while there was uncontradicted evidence a certified cheque was tendered, this did not undermine the conclusion that the full amount was owing based on the invoices.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

The appellant appealed a trial judgment regarding a contract dispute over manufacturing work.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge's findings of fact were inconsistent with his legal conclusions.

Specifically, the trial judge found that the respondent failed to complete work in a timely manner, which constituted a breach of contract, entitling the appellant to damages subject to mitigation.

The Court of Appeal varied the trial judgment to award the appellant damages for the cost of new tools and laser cut parts, while upholding the award to the respondent for compression costs.