What is the effect of the Master's findings of fact on a mortgage application?

It is not necessary to review the evidence in detail. The Master did so, and I do not, for the most part differ with her findings of fact. I do, however, reach a different conclusion as to the disposition of this application. I cannot agree that, on the material, the respondent is "bound to lose" at trial, because I do not see the mortgage as quite so hermetically separate from the other dealings of the parties as the Master did. It is not uncommon for a mortgage to be only one element in a series of legal relationships between parties. In such circumstances, the courts are scrupulous about differentiating what constitutes a defence to a mortgage from such other claims. So, for example, where a vendor is accused of misrepresentations inducing a purchase of land, such claims are treated as no defence to default on a mortgage back in the same purchase, but must be raised independently, or as a counter-claim (See Fuchs et al v. Dunlop (1977) 3 B.C.L.R. 181 (B.C.S.C.)).