The Applicant brought an Action, commenced by way of Originating Application under Rule 3.8, seeking relief related to various declarations needed prior to selling a residential property. The Respondent disputed the validity of service of the Application on two adult children who had an interest on title of the residential property. The Respondent took the position that service was not effected in a manner prescribed under Rule 11.4. As such, Justice Mandziuk considered the preliminary issue of whether service was effective.

Justice Mandziuk recognized that the purported service was not completed in a method contemplated under Rule 11.5. Further, the Applicant had failed to bring an Application either validating service pursuant to Rule 11.27 or for substitutional service pursuant to Rule 11.28. As such, Justice Mandziuk concluded that service had not been affected and the matter was adjourned until such time as the Respondents are successfully served.