Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 27 FEBRUARY 2015

Placing Privacy Over Practicality

Drawing the line between privacy and practicality is not always easy, even for the Justices of the Court of Appeal, who divided narrowly on the issue.

CanadaPrivacy

Drawing the line between privacy and practicality is not always easy, even for the Justices of the Court of Appeal, who divided narrowly on the issue.

Just before Christmas the Ontario Court of Appeal released a split 3-2 decision in a case that pitted the privacy rights of judgment debtors against the execution rights of judgment creditors.

The Royal Bank of Canada ("RBC") had obtained a judgment of just over $26,000 against the defendants. The defendants owned a residential property that RBC wished to have the Sheriff seize and sell so that the bank could collect on its judgment. Since the property had a mortgage registered on title, the Sheriff would not sell the property without a mortgage discharge statement (the "Statement") from the mortgagee (in this case Scotiabank).

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from