Short Answer
The facts of a case heard by the Supreme Court of Canada are as follows: Mr.and Mrs.H were induced to sign a mortgage in favour of M.C.R.Ltd.by Johnston,a man living with their daughter.Johnston led them to believe that the document was an unimportant amendment to an existing mortgage when,in reality,it was a second substantial mortgage on their home.Neither read the document nor questioned it.When the payments were in arrears,the mortgagee took an action for foreclosure (to take their home).Mr.and Mrs.H.pleaded non est factum.Would this defence succeed? If so,why; if not,why not?
Correct Answer:

Verified
The defence would not succeed ...View Answer
Unlock this answer now
Get Access to more Verified Answers free of charge
Correct Answer:
Verified
View Answer
Unlock this answer now
Get Access to more Verified Answers free of charge
Q16: Indicate three situations where the courts will
Q33: What does it mean that an assignee
Q51: A provision in equity whereby one person
Q63: Fraud does not exist if the victim
Q69: Len was behind in his work at
Q71: Mr.Frank,a foreman supervising some 43 employees,was asked
Q77: In Moss v.Chin,Chin's insurer,ICBC,made an offer to
Q79: Joe,a student at the local college,had a
Q88: Discuss the concept of an assignment, including
Q96: Sam agreed to buy property from Joe