This was an application for leave to appeal from a decision of the trial judge. The trial judge held that there had been no agreement to renew a mortgage.
The borrower argued that although there was no express agreement to renew the loan there had been an agreement had been made by implication. The court found that even if there had been some conduct by the lender to that effect there had also been conduct to the contrary. Namely the commencement of proceedings for possession of a property which was mortgaged. Thus at the highest the lender’s conduct was ambiguous. This precluded any implication that it had agreed to renew the loan.
Leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed with costs.