Canada: How to Limit Rights of Set-Off

A recent Ontario Superior Court of Justice case has highlighted the issues surrounding the right of set-off. This is a relevant topic to any lender who takes an absolute assignment of receivables as part of its financing package, and in particular to lenders who are in the business of factoring receivables.

Facts of Case

In Commercial Factors of Seattle LP v. CIBC1, the facts were as follows. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce ("CIBC") retained IT Group Inc. ("IT") to hire consultants ("Consultants") to provide technology services to CIBC pursuant to a staffing agreement dated May 1, 2006, as amended (the "Agreement").IT was to pay the Consultants' wages and benefits, and CIBC then paid that amount plus a mark-up to IT. IT sold the accounts receivable from CIBC to Commercial Factors of Seattle LP doing business as First Vancouver Finance ("First Vancouver").IT gave notice of the assignment to CIBC, and First Vancouver registered the assignment of receivables pursuant to the Personal Property Security Act (Ontario) (the "PPSA")2.CIBC subsequently discovered that IT had failed to pay certain Consultants. Although not legally required to do so, CIBC paid the Consultants and then deducted those amounts from invoices issued to CIBC by IT on the basis that IT was liable to pay those Consultants. CIBC then took an assignment from the Consultants of the sum IT had owed them. As a result, First Vancouver was not paid the full invoice amount which it had purchased and so brought an action against CIBC for the full invoice amount.


The application raised the following issues:

  1. Was CIBC relieved of its obligation to make payments under the Agreement as a result of IT's failure to pay the Consultants?

  2. If not, was CIBC entitled to rely on the remedy of equitable set-off to set off the amounts owing by IT to the Consultants and assigned to CIBC against amounts owing by CIBC to IT under the Agreement?

    1. Can CIBC assert equitable set-off despite having notice of assignment of the invoices? (Does section 40(1.1)(b) of the Personal Property Security Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.10 (the "PPSA"), apply to equitable set-off as well as legal set-off?)

    2. Are the amounts that CIBC has purported to set off sufficiently closely connected to give rise to equitable set-off pursuant to Holt v. Telford, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 193 (S.C.C.)?3

Law of Assignment

Before reviewing the issues set out by the court, it is useful to review briefly the law which enables First Vancouver to make a claim directly against CIBC. The Conveyancing and Law of Property Act4 provides:

53.(1) Any absolute assignment made on or after the 31st day of December, 1897, by writing under the hand of the assignor, not purporting to be by way of charge only, of any debt or other legal chose in action of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to receive or claim such debt or chose in action is effectual in law, subject to all equities that would have been entitled to priority over the right of the assignee if this section had not been enacted, to pass and transfer the legal right to such debt or chose in action from the date of such notice, and all legal and other remedies for the same, and the power to give a good discharge for the same without the concurrence of the assignor.

In this case, the sale of receivables was an absolute assignment and notice of the assignment was given by IT to CIBC in writing. It is therefore clear that First Vancouver had the right to sue CIBC in its own name, "subject to the equities" that existed at the date of the notice given to CIBC by First Vancouver of the assignment.

Issue One – Was Agreement Terminated?

On the first issue set out above, the court found that CIBC was not relieved of its obligation to make payments under the Agreement as a result of IT's failure to pay the Consultants. In short, CIBC continued to treat the Agreement as being in full force and effect and continued to accept the benefit of the services of the Consultants under the Agreement. CIBC did not terminate the Agreement until written notice of default was given by CIBC to IT which occurred after the date of the invoices in question.

Issue Two – Equitable Set-off versus Statutory Set-off

In order to determine the second question, whether CIBC was entitled to rely on the remedy of equitable set-off, the court first looked at the differences between legal and equitable set-off. The court reviewed the case of Holt v. Telford5, where the Supreme Court considered and adopted the principles governing equitable set-off as set out in Coba Industries Ltd. v. Millie's Holdings (Canada) Ltd6.

In Holt v. Telford, the Telfords sold land (the "Telford Sale") to Canadian Stanley Development Ltd. ("Canadian Stanley") for $265,000. At the same time, Canadian Stanley sold land to the Telfords (the "Canadian Stanley Sale") for the same purchase price. In each case, a partial payment was made and a mortgage for the balance was taken back. Canadian Stanley assigned the Telford mortgage to the Holts, without notice to the Telfords. Following the assignment, the Telfords paid $50,000 under the mortgage held by Canadian Stanley, conditional on receipt of a discharge. The Telfords argued that the balance owing on such mortgage, while not yet due, was offset by the amount owing on the mortgage in their favour. Because the mortgage had been assigned, the Holts refused to discharge the mortgage and claimed against the Telfords for the whole amount owing under the assigned mortgage. The court found that there was no agreement to set off, and so in order to win the case, the Telfords had to demonstrate that they had a right of set-off at law or in equity.

The court in Holt v. Telford summarized statutory set-off, which required the fulfillment of two conditions. The first was that both obligations must be debts. The second was that both debts must be mutual cross obligations.7 Under this definition, any assignment would destroy mutuality and therefore destroy the possibility of set-off at law.

The court then went on to decide whether a set-off was available in equity. The court first reviewed the case law surrounding equitable set-off. The court relied on five principles which were set out in Coba Industries Ltd. v. Millie's Holdings (Canada) Ltd as follows:

  1. The party relying on a set-off must show some equitable ground for being protected against his adversary's demands.
  2. The equitable ground must go to the very root of the plaintiff's claim before a set-off will be allowed.
  3. A cross-claim must be so clearly connected with the demand of the plaintiff that it would be manifestly unjust to allow the plaintiff to enforce payment without taking into consideration the cross-claim.
  4. The plaintiff's claim and the cross-claim need not arise out of the same contract.
  5. Unliquidated claims are on the same footing as liquidated claims.8

Overall, the court in Coba Industries Ltd. v. Millie's Holdings (Canada) Ltd concluded that in the case of equitable set-off, an assignee takes subject to cross-claims, including claims for damages, arising after the date of the notice of assignment.

In the case of Holt v. Telford, the court found that the Telfords were able to demonstrate that the debts arose out of the same contract or closely interrelated contracts and, as a result, allowed the debts to be set off. Because the Telford mortgage and the Canadian Stanley mortgage were part of the land exchange deal, being part of the consideration for the reciprocal transfers, the court considered that they were closely connected and met the requirements for an equitable set-off.

Issue Two A – Can CIBC Assert Equitable Set-off Despite Having Notice of Assignment?

In Commercial Factors of Seattle LP v. CIBC, it was clear that CIBC could not assert legal set-off because it had received notice of assignment. The court then looked at the issue of whether CIBC could assert equitable set-off despite having had notice of the assignment of the invoices. Specifically, it considered the question of whether Section 40(1.1)(b) of the PPSA applied to equitable set-off as well as legal set-off.

Section 40(1.1) of the PPSA provides as follows:

(1.1) An account debtor who has not made an enforceable agreement not to assert defences arising out of the contract between the account debtor and the assignor may set up by way of defence against the assignee,

  1. all defences available to the account debtor against the assignor arising out of the terms of the contract or a related contract, including equitable set-off and misrepresentation; and

  2. the right to set off any amount owing to the account debtor that was payable to the account debtor before the account debtor received notice of the assignment.

CIBC argued that the specific reference to equitable set-off in Section 40(1.1)(a) made it clear that subsection (b) only applied to legal set-off. The court agreed that set-off in Section 40(1.1)(b) of the PPSA refers only to legal or statutory set-off, and not to equitable set-off. The court reviewed the legislative commentary surrounding Bill 1529 which was passed in 2006 and stated that Section 40(1.1) was not considered a substantive change. Rather, it was "intended to restate the current law about the defences available by an account debtor as against an assignee, and was not intended to make any substantive changes to the common law or the rule currently in Section 40(1)."10 The court quoted a consultation paper released prior to the 2006 amendments by the Ministry of Government Services which illustrated the mechanics of the current Section 40(1) with the following scenario:

"A person (the account debtor) purchases a new vehicle from a car dealership (the assignor) pursuant to a conditional sales contract, and the dealership then assigns this contract to a financing institution (the assignee/secured party). Once the assignee notifies the account debtor of the assignment, the account debtor must make future installment payments under the sales contract directly to the assignee.

However, Section 40(1)(a) permits the account debtor to raise any defence or claim with the assignee that it could have served against the assignor with regard to the sales contract (this concept is known as equitable set-off).Therefore, if the car was defective, the account debtor would be able to set off any damages resulting from this defect against the demand by the assignee to pay the balance of the sales contract. Furthermore, Section 40(1)(b), which incorporates the concept of statutory set-off, allows the account debtor to set off against the assignee any other defence or claim that the account debtor has against the assignor, including a defence or claim arising from an unconnected transaction, that existed before the account debtor received notice of the assignment."11

As a result, the court confirmed that the right to set off referred to in Section 40(1.1)(b) of the PPSA refers to the right to legal set-off, and so did not limit CIBC's right to assert equitable set-off to the time before CIBC received notice of the assignment of the accounts receivable from First Vancouver. The court concluded that equitable set-off was available where there had been an assignment.

Issue Two B – Are Amounts CIBC Wanted to Set Off Sufficiently Closely Connected to Meet the Test for Equitable Set-off?

The final question that the court considered was whether the amounts that CIBC purported to set off were sufficiently closely connected to meet the test for equitable set-off in Holt v. Telford. The court found that CIBC's cross-claim was sufficiently connected for equitable set-off to apply. The Agreement required IT to pay the Consultants. When IT did not pay this amount, CIBC paid the amount that IT was contracted to pay, as it was of the view that if the Consultants were not paid for their work, there was a serious risk that they would not complete the project for CIBC and CIBC would as a result suffer damages.

How Can Lenders Protect Themselves Against Set-off?

The case of Commercial Factors of Seattle LP v. CIBC highlights the importance of drafting assignment documents with a view to protecting lenders from an account debtor's extensive right of set-off. An experienced lender should ensure that the underlying contract that is being assigned contains a waiver of defences. The following phrase is an example of appropriate language, also sometimes known as a "hell or high water clause":

"Obligor agrees not to assert against the assignee any claim by way of abatement, defence, set-off, compensation, counter-claim or the like which obligor may have against the assignor. Upon notice of an assignment obligor shall unconditionally pay to such assignee all payments and other amounts due hereunder and shall not assert any defence against such assignee in any action for payments or other amount due and payable hereunder."

If the underlying contract being assigned does not contain language similar to this, then the lender should ensure that the assignment documentation itself includes such language and is acknowledged by the account debtor. Financing a contract that does not contain this clause means that the financer may be subject to any defences which the obligor had against the assignor.

In general, case law has held these clauses to be enforceable. For example, in Key Equipment Finance Canada Ltd. v. Jacques Whitford Limited ("Key Equipment"), Jacques Whitford Limited ("Whitford") entered contracts with Oracle Corporation Canada Inc. ("Oracle") to provide computer applications and services. The contracts were assigned by Oracle to Key Equipment Finance Canada Ltd. ("Key"). Whitford subsequently sued Oracle alleging that Oracle fundamentally breached its contract. Whitford stopped making payments to Key and Key sought summary judgment.

The agreement which was assigned in Key Equipment contained an exclusion clause which stated, among other things, that "Customer shall not assert against Assignee any claim, defense, counterclaim or setoff that Customer may have against Supplier. Customer waives all rights to make any claim against Assignee for any loss or damage of the System...."

The court gave summary judgment for Key, holding that the defendant was bound to pay, notwithstanding claims by the defendant that Oracle had not done what it had undertaken to do. The court concluded that the wording of the exclusion clause was specific, unambiguous and comprehensive. In her reasons for judgment, Hood J. quoted:

"In Hunter and the cases which have subsequently followed it, the prima facie assumption is that the contract will be enforced. The exception arises only if the contract is unconscionable, such as might arise between parties of unequal bargaining power...."13

The court did consider the argument that Key is subject to the equities inherent in its relationship with Oracle, since Key is Oracle's assignee, but concluded that this rule was excluded since the exclusion clause applied, as well as for other reasons relating to the conduct of Whitford.14


Overall, when entering into any agreement where contracts or receivables are assigned to a lender, in order for the lender to make a successful claim against the underlying account debtor, it is vital for the lender to ensure three things. First of all, that the contract contains a waiver of defences. As discussed above, if this is not in the underlying contract with the account debtor or otherwise acknowledged by the account debtor, the lender may be subject to any defences that the account debtor has against the assignor. Secondly, as per section 53(1) of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, the assignment must be absolute. Finally, notice of the assignment must be given to the account debtor.


1.2010 ONSC 3516, [2010] O.J. No. 2663 (ONT S.C.J.)

2.R.S.O. 1990, c.P.10.

3.Ibid. at para.3

4.R.S.O. 1990, c. C.34

5. [1987] 2 S.C.R. 193 (S.C.C.)

6. [1985] B.C.J. No. 1994 (B.C.C.A.)

7Supra note 4 at para.25

8Ibid. at para.34

9Bill 152, Ministry of Government Services Consumer Protection and Service Modernization Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c.34

10.Supra note 1 at para.36

11., p.7.

12.2006 N.S.S.C. 68

13.Ibid. at para. 7

14.Ibid. at para. 121

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.