The Applicant sought an Order authorizing the seizure and sale of certain residential property pursuant to an assignment of a receiver’s rights in the Applicant’s favour.

In response, the Respondent argued that the Application should be dismissed due to the delay in pursuing it, pursuant to Rule 4.31. The Respondent argued that if the receiver wanted to pursue this Application, it could and should have done so when the Application was originally filed several years prior. The Respondent stated that the delay led to prejudice; namely, his inability to refinance, sell, or take financial management of the residential property for several years.

The Court did not accept the Respondent’s argument and found no evidence of the significant prejudice required under Rule 4.31.

Notwithstanding the failure of the Respondent’s delay argument, the Court denied the Application for seizure and sale on the basis that it was premature.