A secured creditor sought a declaration that the automatic stay of proceedings under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act did not prevent it from enforcing an eviction order against a debtor who had filed a consumer proposal.
The court dismissed the request for a declaration but lifted the stay on the basis that the creditor would be materially prejudiced by its continuation.
The court found that the creditor's enforcement of a court judgment for possession was distinct from realizing on security and therefore subject to the stay, but that material prejudice warranted lifting the stay to permit the eviction to proceed.
