The Court held that a mortgagee's power under a mortgage clause permitting release 'on any terms that the credit provider sees fit' and allowing it to demand release of claims does not extend to requiring the mortgagor to release and indemnify persons and entities who are not credit providers under the mortgage, nor to demanding an indemnity more expansive than that already contained in the mortgage. Where a mortgagee refuses a valid tender for reasons unsupported by the mortgage, the mortgagee is not entitled to interest from the date of refusal, following the general rule stated in Saafin Constructions. The Court also held, applying Overton Investments, that a mortgagee who refuses a valid tender at a payout figure it had itself advised cannot subsequently contend the tender was insufficient for failing to include an additional security amount demanded only after the refusal.
The full text is available to signed-in members.