The plaintiff argues that if the defendants misrepresented that they would execute a subsequent mortgage, the court may find an equitable mortgage. The plaintiff points to no case law to support this position, but argues that a Rule 21 motion should not be granted merely because of the novelty of the action: Hunt v. Carey, 1990 CanLII 90 (SCC), [1990] 2 S.C.R. 959 (S.C.C.).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.