2609413 Ontario Inc. v. Brant

2609413 Ontario Inc. v. Brant

The mortgage was properly interpreted in the context of the APS and the Transfer and Consultancy Agreement, which made the $300,000 payment contingent on the purchaser obtaining a cultivation licence; absent the licence the payment did not become due, so the motion judge correctly granted summary judgment to the respondent to recover the funds, order release of trust funds, and expunge the mortgage, and the Court of Appeal found no palpable and overriding error.

Citation
2025 ONCA 788
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: 2609413 Ontario Inc.; Defendant/appellant: Amanda Ellis Brant (also known as Amanda Elizabeth Brant; also known as Amanda Elizabeth Ellis); Defendant/responding Party: Barton J. Seguin; Defendant/responding Party: Halliwell Seguin LLP
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Superior Court of Justice / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Summary Judgment Motion
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; motion judge's orders upheld
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Forbearance Agreement, Mortgage as Security, Conditional Payment, Licence Contingency, Power of Sale, Trust Funds
Source Language
English
Civil Contract Real Property Equity Summary Judgment Forbearance Agreement Mortgage as Security Conditional Payment +3 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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

2609413 Ontario Inc.

Plaintiff/respondent

Amanda Ellis Brant (also known as Amanda Elizabeth Brant; also known as Amanda Elizabeth Ellis)

Defendant/appellant

Barton J. Seguin

Defendant/responding Party

Halliwell Seguin LLP

Defendant/responding Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Superior Court of Justice / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Summary Judgment Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the registered mortgage constituted an unconditional obligation to pay $300,000 or was security for a contingent consulting fee payable only upon receipt of a cultivation licence
  2. 2 Whether the mortgage was properly characterized as a forbearance agreement
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment was appropriate given the evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The mortgage was properly interpreted in the context of the APS and the Transfer and Consultancy Agreement, which made the $300,000 payment contingent on the purchaser obtaining a cultivation licence; absent the licence the payment did not become due, so the motion judge correctly granted summary judgment to the respondent to recover the funds, order release of trust funds, and expunge the mortgage, and the Court of Appeal found no palpable and overriding error.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; motion judge's orders upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs of the appeal payable to 2609413 Ontario Inc. in the amount of $6,000 CAD, all-inclusive