Cambridge LLP successfully defended a motion brought by a mortgagor seeking leave after breaching a peremptory order. In a February 9, 2026 endorsement, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed a motion by 2567616 Ontario Inc. and Harmander Gill seeking relief from a peremptory deadline to file responding materials in a mortgage enforcement summary trial.
The defendants failed to comply with an August 22, 2025 deadline imposed by a prior court order. They asked the Court to permit late filing based on alleged ineffective assistance from counsel, the plaintiff’s own delay, personal stress and medical issues, and the need to respond to abuse-related allegations raised by a co-guarantor.
The Court rejected each argument.
Most significantly, although the defendants blamed former counsel for missing the deadline, no proposed responding affidavit was filed with the motion. The Court held that relief from a peremptory order requires the moving party to demonstrate the materiality of the evidence they seek to file. Without seeing the affidavit, the Court could not assess whether justice required permitting late evidence. Granting relief in those circumstances would amount to an “unmerited free pass.”
The Court also found that:
- Any issues with the plaintiff’s evidence were irrelevant to the defendants’ non-compliance.
- The defendant’s personal circumstances did not credibly explain the delay.
- Allowing a last-minute affidavit would unfairly prejudice the co-guarantor, whose defence includes allegations of duress in signing the guarantee.
The motion was dismissed, and costs were awarded on a partial indemnity basis: $10,000 to the plaintiff and $20,000 to the co-defendant, payable within 30 days.