Background:

• The Applicant, Mel Cohen Realty Ltd., a mortgagee under a Vendor Take Back (VTB) mortgage, sought a court-appointed receiver for a commercial property in Ottawa after default.
• The Respondent, Merget Holdings Inc. (Mortgagor), disputed the validity and amount of the debt in two Toronto actions (CV-23-709899 & CV-23-713867), asserting equitable setoff and indemnity claims.
• Instead of enforcing its contractual power of sale or commencing a mortgage action, the Applicant filed this standalone receivership application.

Court’s Findings:

1. No Insolvency (BIA Not Engaged): The Respondent was not failing to meet obligations, making BIA sections 47 & 243 inapplicable.
2. Jurisdictional Issue (CJA, s. 101): This section requires an interlocutory order in an existing or intended proceeding, which did not exist here.
3. Extraordinary Nature of Receivership: Courts take a holistic approach (Canadian Equipment Finance v. Hypoint Co., 2022 ONSC 6186), but receivership remains exceptional.
4. Adequate Property Value & No Urgency: The property’s equity exceeded the total mortgage debt ($3.4M), making a receiver unnecessary.
5. Toronto Litigation Should Proceed First: The court discouraged parallel proceedings and suggested consolidation in Toronto or Ottawa.

Decision:

• Application dismissed without prejudice.
• Costs: To be determined if not agreed upon.
• No monetary damages were awarded.