LogoInsolvency Insider Canada
TOPICS
TOPICS

Assets for sale

Commercial List Users' Committee

Court cases

Creditor notices

Events

Firm News

Insights

Interviews

Open Positions

Recent filings

FILING DATABASE
DOCUMENT LIBRARY
AWARDS
EVENTS
DIRECTORY
Search
SUBSCRIBE
paper-plane-tilt
LogoInsolvency Insider Canada
  • Home
  • Posts
  • Dupont Street landlords put into receivership over Extend mortgage debt

Dupont Street landlords put into receivership over Extend mortgage debt

Dina Kovacevic
Dina Kovacevic

May 31, 2026

Albert Gelman Inc. appointed over 950 and 1020 Dupont Street after borrower missed interest payments, failed to make a $1.1 million cure payment and floated a proposed $20 million tenant sale without financing evidence

Dupont Street landlords put into receivership over Extend mortgage debt

950 Dupont Street and 1020 Dupont Street, two Toronto commercial properties, were placed into receivership on May 21, 2026, on application by Extend Financial Ltd., owed approximately $19.3 million under an $18 million mortgage loan. Justice W.D. Black granted the receivership order after a prior adjournment failed to produce the promised repayment and after the respondents did not make a $1.1 million payment that had been agreed as a condition of avoiding an immediate receivership order.

The application was brought by Extend against 1896841 Ontario Limited, 1338940 Ontario Limited, Patrick Gray Johnson and Mark David Johnson. The borrower, 1896841 Ontario Limited, owns 950 Dupont Street and operates as a commercial landlord. Related company 1338940 Ontario Limited owns 1020 Dupont Street and is also described as a commercial landlord. Mark Johnson is the sole director and officer of the borrower, while Patrick Johnson is the sole director and officer of 1338940 Ontario Limited.

The properties are distinct but tied together through Extend’s security package. The 950 Dupont property is described as a commercial-use building with approximately 10 units, some leased to businesses including a related furniture retailer called GH Johnson’s Trading Company, a youth athletic centre and a dance studio. The 1020 Dupont property is described in the affidavit as a vacant, deteriorated 3-storey warehouse building.

Extend’s debt arose from a refinancing completed in 2025. Under a commitment letter dated April 16, 2025, as amended June 4, 2025, Extend advanced an $18 million loan to the borrower. The loan was used to refinance indebtedness relating to 950 Dupont while the borrower was in a BIA proposal proceeding with msi Spergel Inc. as proposal trustee. Financial pressure emerged quickly after the refinancing. The borrower prepaid approximately five months of interest at the time the commitment was executed, then was required to make monthly interest-only payments. It missed its regularly scheduled payment due January 1, 2026 and made no further payments other than a $50,000 partial payment on February 13, 2026. Extend demanded repayment on February 25, 2026 and stated that, as of that date, the borrower owed $19.313 million, plus per diem interest, costs, legal fees and other expenses.

Extend also tried to intercept rent at 950 Dupont before moving for a receivership order, delivering attornment notices to tenants on October 6, 2025, directing them to pay rent to Extend. None reportedly complied.

The receivership application first came before Justice Steele on April 22, 2026. The respondents obtained a consent adjournment after representing that they had a pending deal that would provide funds to pay out Extend. Under the agreed terms, the respondents were required to pay $1.1 million by May 6, failing which Extend could return at the earliest available date to take out the receivership order on consent. Extend later agreed to extend the deadline to May 13, but the respondents still failed to make the payment.

At the May 21 hearing, respondents’ counsel advised of another potential deal under which one of the properties would be sold to a tenant for $20 million. Justice Black was not persuaded to delay the receivership. The proposed deposit was only $20,000, a figure the court described as anomalously low for a purchase of that size, and the respondents had not provided a commitment letter or other proof of financing. Justice Black held that if the purchase agreement proved real and substantial, it could be considered by the receiver once appointed.

Albert Gelman is the receiver. Counsel is Robins Appleby for Extend and Manis Law for the respondents.

Canada’s insolvency news, in your inbox.

Join 15,000+ readers.

Keep Reading

View more
caret-right

UPCOMING EVENTS

Distressed Private Capital Conference - November 12, 2026

Distressed Private Capital Conference - November 12, 2026

Future Leaders Conference 2026

Future Leaders Conference 2026

Distressed Real Estate Conference - October 21, 2026

Distressed Real Estate Conference - October 21, 2026

LATEST STORIES

Receiver appointed over Westbank-linked Vancouver rental project

Receiver appointed over Westbank-linked Vancouver rental project

Sunshine Oilsands placed into receivership over mounting environmental liabilities

Sunshine Oilsands placed into receivership over mounting environmental liabilities

Vancouver commercial property placed into receivership over $14.3 million debt

Vancouver commercial property placed into receivership over $14.3 million debt

Bill C-39 May Narrow WEPPA Access in Reverse Vesting Orders

Bill C-39 May Narrow WEPPA Access in Reverse Vesting Orders

Insolvency Insider Canada

Insolvency Insider Canada

Essential Canadian insolvency news, trends and legal updates

EXPLORE

About Us / Contact

Advertise