Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Nazareth

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Nazareth

The CRA-registered lien constituted a contractually specified event permitting the bank to demand payment; the loan was not paid and therefore summary judgment was properly granted enforcing the contract, the counterclaim had no evidentiary basis to raise a genuine issue, and the costs award followed the contractual entitlement.

Citation
2012 ONCA 464
Parties
Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim (respondent): Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce; Defendant/ Plaintiff by Counterclaim (appellant): Yorick Nazareth
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Collection / Appeal From Superior Court Summary Judgment Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Loan Agreement, Mortgage, Acceleration Clause, Tax Lien (cra), Costs (substantial Indemnity), Counterclaim, Identity Fraud Allegation
Source Language
English
Civil Contract Property Commercial Law Summary Judgment Loan Agreement Mortgage Acceleration Clause +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce

Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim (respondent)

Yorick Nazareth

Defendant/ Plaintiff by Counterclaim (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Collection / Appeal From Superior Court Summary Judgment Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CRA lien triggered the loan contract's demand/acceleration clause
  2. 2 Whether allegations of identity fraud prevent enforcement of the contract or defeat summary judgment
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's counterclaim raised a genuine issue for trial

Ratio Decidendi

The CRA-registered lien constituted a contractually specified event permitting the bank to demand payment; the loan was not paid and therefore summary judgment was properly granted enforcing the contract, the counterclaim had no evidentiary basis to raise a genuine issue, and the costs award followed the contractual entitlement.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judgment ordered for respondent in the amount of $499,843.04