Remedies
Author | Ronald C.C. Cuming, Catherine Walsh, Roderick Wood |
Pages | 613-691 |
613
CHAPTER 12
REMEDIES
A. InTRoduCTIon
1) Personal Claims and Proprietary Claims
A creditor who is given a security interest in the debtor’s property ob-
tains a proprietar y right to the collateral. The defining characterist ic of
a proprietary right (which is also referred to as a real right or a right in
rem) is that it is a right in a thing that is generally enforceable against
the world. By way of contrast, a personal right is a right in respect of
a particular person or identifiable group of persons. For example, a
creditor who lends money to a debtor has a personal right to recover
the debt. This right is owed only by the debtor to the creditor.
A proprietary right in t he form of a security intere st may be directly
vindicated by enforcement of the security interest. This will typically
involve the seizure and sale of tangible collateral in the hands of the
debtor or in the hands of some third party to whom it has been trans-
ferred. The law provides another means by which the secured party’s
proprietary right in the collateral may be protected. A secured party is
given a personal right against a person who wrongfully interferes with
the secured part y’s security interest in the collateral. A secur ity interest
therefore provides the foundation for two distinct types of claims that
can be made by the secured party: (1) the enforcement of the security
interest against the collateral; and (2) a personal claim against persons
who wrongfully interfere with the collateral.
PERSO NAL PROPERT Y SECUR ITY LAW614
Part 5 of the PPSA provides a comprehensive remedial system that
sets out in considerable detail the rights and obligations of a secured
party who seeks to enforce its claim against the collateral. In contrast,
the right of a secured party to bring a personal action against those
who interfere with the collateral is almost entirely unregulated by the
PPSA. Instead, the Act leaves these matters to be determined by the
common law.
This chapter will focus primarily on the remedial system found
in Part 5 of the Act. However, in order to appreciate the full range of
remedies available to a secured pa rty, it is also necessar y to understand
how the common law protects proprietary interests through the avail-
ability of personal actions against persons who unlawfully interfere
with the secured party’s interest. This chapter will therefore conclude
with a discussion of the available personal actions.
2) Secured and Unsecured Creditors’ Remedies
One of the major reasons why a creditor may wish to take a security
interest in the debtor’s property is that it gives the creditor a superior
set of enforcement remedies. Without a security interest, the creditor
has no proprietary interest in the debtor’s assets, and must enforce the
claim through the provincial judgment enforcement system. In order
to do this, the creditor must bring a civil action and obtain a judgment.
This can produce delays, particularly if the debtor defends the action.
Once a judgment is obtained, the creditor will usually obtain a writ of
execution, writ of enforcement or judgment charge. The creditor will
then seek to enforce the judgment through seizure and sale of the debt-
or’s personal property, garnishment of intangible claims, or sale pro-
ceedings against the debtor’s land. These proceedings tend to be more
cumbersome, particularly in jurisdictions that have not reformed their
judgment enforcement systems. As well, the judgment enforcement
creditor is generally required to share funds produced as a result of
enforcement proceedings with other judgment enforcement creditors.
A creditor who takes a security interest in some or all of the debtor’s
personal property has a more powerful set of default remedies. The se-
cured creditor does not need to obtain a judgment before commencing
enforcement proceedings. Upon default, the secured creditor has the
right to take possession of the collateral. In most jurisdictions, a seizure
and sale of personal property does not need to be undertaken by the
sheriff. In six PPSA jurisdictions, provincial and territorial exemptions
law does not apply to secured creditors (the other six have enacted legis-
lation that makes security interests subject to exemptions).
Remedies 615
Despite the superiority of its secured party remedies, a creditor
may decide to invoke its judgment enforcement remedies. If the se-
cured party is undersecured (that is, if the anticipated proceeds from
the collateral are insufficient to cover the obligation secured), the se-
cured party may wish to obtain a judgment to cover the shortfall. This
shortfall is commonly referred to as a “deficiency,” and the judgment
obtained in respect of it is called a “deficiency judgment.” The creditor
may then use the judgment enforcement system in order to proceed
against the debtor’s unencumbered property to collect the deficien-
cy. The PPSA provides that a security interest does not merge merely
because the claim has been reduced to judgment.1 The creditor may
therefore invoke its secured party remedies against the collateral and
concurrently invoke its judgment enforcement remedies against the
debtor’s other assets. Of course, the creditor cannot receive more than
one satisfaction of the judgment debt. Any amount received from the
disposition of the collateral must be applied so as to reduce the amount
payable on the judgment.
In other instances, a secured party may decide to enforce its claim
using its judgment enforcement remedies instead of its secured party
remedies. This might occur if the secured party has a security interest
in one piece of equipment, but has obtained judgment and is directing
seizure of several other pieces of equipment under judgment enforce-
ment proceedings. Under these circumstances, it may be more conven-
ient to have all the property seized under the judgment enforcement
proceedings rather than having to effect two different types of enforce-
ment proceedings. The fact that the secured party instructs seizure
of the collateral under judgment enforcement proceedings should not
prevent the secured party from asserting its secured party’s remedies.
Therefore, the secured party may choose to sell its collateral under the
sale mechanism set out in the PPSA despite the fact that seizure was
undertaken under judgment enforcement proceedings.
Although the remedies are cumulative, a secured party will even-
tually be required to make an election between inconsistent remedies.
For example, a secured party who elects to exercise its right under the
PPSA to retain the collateral in satisfaction of the obligation secured
thereafter loses t he right to recover on a judgment, since the underlying
obligation is extinguished. However, a claimant will not be regarded
1 PPSA (A, NB, PEI, NW T, Nu) s 55(8); BC s 55(9); M s 55(4); (NL, NS) s 56(8); O
s 59(7), S s 55(7); Y s 53(9).
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
