Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Rockway Holdings Ltd. et al., (1996) 5 O.T.C. 69 (GD)

• Judge: Salhany, J.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: Thursday April 18, 1996
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1996), 5 O.T.C. 69 (GD)

CIBC v. Rockway Holdings Ltd. (1996), 5 O.T.C. 69 (GD)

MLB headnote and full text

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (applicant) v. Rockway Holdings Limited and Katmos Farms Limited (respondents)

(56/96)

Indexed As: Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Rockway Holdings Ltd. et al.

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Salhany, J.

April 18, 1996.

Summary:

A property owner granted an exclusive licence to remove all gravel from its property. A year and a half later, the owner's bank registered a lien on the property to secure a loan. A year and a half after the bank had registered its lien, the licensee registered the licence agreement. The bank applied for a declaration that its charge had priority over the licence agreement. The licensee asserted that its charge had priority, where the bank had actual notice of the licence agreement.

The Ontario Court (General Division) concluded that the bank had actual notice and dismissed the application.

Real Property - Topic 7803

Title - Registration of instruments - General principles - What constitutes an instrument - See paragraphs 5, 6.

Real Property - Topic 8064

Title - Registration of instruments - Notice of prior instrument - Actual knowledge of prior instrument - See paragraphs 7 to 19.

Real Property - Topic 8066

Title - Registration of instruments - Notice of prior instrument - What constitutes notice - See paragraphs 7 to 19.

Cases Noticed:

Atlantic Concrete Ltd. v. McDonald Lavatte Construction Co. and Sydney Steel Corp. (1975), 12 N.S.R.(2d) 179; 6 A.P.R. 179 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

Cherry v. Petch, [1948] O.W.N. 378 (H.C.), consd. [para. 5].

McLeod v. Lawson (1906), 8 O.W.R. 213 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

McLeod v. Crawford - see McLeod v. Lawson.

Rose v. Peterkin (1885), 13 S.C.R. 677, consd. [para. 9].

New Brunswick Railway v. Kelly (1895), 33 N.B.R. 310 (C.A.), affd. (1896), 26 S.C.R. 341, consd. [para. 10].

Smith v. Thornton (1922), 52 O.L.R. 492 (C.A.), consd. [para. 11].

Whitehead v. Lach General Contractors Ltd. (1974), 46 D.L.R.(3d) 500 (Ont. C.A.), consd. [para. 12].

Sutherland, Re, [1967] 1 O.R. 611 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12].

Babcock v. Archibald (1981), 127 D.L.R.(3d) 77 (Ont. H.C.), consd. [para. 13].

Babcock v. Carr - see Babcock v. Archibald.

Young v. 253819 Developments Ltd. (1979), 24 O.R.(2d) 73 (H.C.), consd. [para. 13].

Stoimenov v. Stoimenov (1982), 26 R.P.R. 166 (Ont. H.C.), consd. [para. 13].

Statutes Noticed:

Registry Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. R-20, sect. 1 [para. 4]; sect. 70(1) [para. 2]; sect. 71 [para. 3].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Anger and Honsberger, The Canadian Law of Real Property (2nd Ed. 1985), vol. 2, p. 973 [para. 5].

Counsel:

F. Stephen Finch, Q.C., for the applicant;

Tim J. McGowan, for the respondent, Rockway Holdings Ltd.;

Frederick E. Leitch, Q.C., for the respondent, Katmos Farms Ltd.

This application was heard at Kitchener, Ontario, before Salhany, J., of the Ontario Court (General Division), who delivered the following reasons for judgment on April 18, 1996.