It is provided by rules 480 and 481 as follows:

480. Upon a reference under a judgment for redemption, the master shall, without any special direction, take an account of what is due to the defendant for principal money and interest, and his costs shall be taxed, and a time and place for payment appointed.

481. Where the judgment is for redemption or foreclosure, or redemption or sale, such proceedings are in such case to be thereupon had, and with the same effect as in an action for foreclosure or sale, and in such case the last encumbrancer shall be treated as the owner of the equity of redemption.

The time allowed to the plaintiff in a redemption action under the ordinary form of judgment will be the same as is usually allowed to the first encumbrancer, (or if there are no subsequent encumbrancers, to the owner of the equity of redemption), in a foreclosure action, namely, six months (j). In the redemption action, however, the plaintiff, who will usually be the owner of the ultimate equity of redemption, has the first opportunity to redeem and on default will be the first to be foreclosed. In case of his default, the last encumbrancer will, for the purpose of subsequent proceedings, be treated as the owner of the equity of redemption.

It is provided by rule 487 as follows:

487. In a redemption action, on default of payment being made according to the report, the defendant shall be entitled, on an ex parte application, to a final order of foreclosure against the plaintiff, or to an order dismissing the action with costs to be paid by the plaintiff.

(j) As to the general conduct of the reference, the taking of the account, the taxing of costs and the appointment of a time and place for redemption, see chapter 24, supra, Action for Foreclosure or Bade, Sec. Sec. 237 ff. See also chapter 27, Accounting between Mortgagor and Mortgagee. For form of report under a judgment for redemption, see Holmested & Langton, Forms and Precedents, 2nd ed., no. 1077.

The time allowed to the plaintiff for redemption will not ordinarily be enlarged (k), but it may be enlarged if the failure to pay the mortgage money within the time appointed was due to mistake. If the application to extend the time is not made until after final order, that order must be vacated before the time is extended (l).

A final decree dismissing an action for the redemption of a legal mortgage operates as a decree for foreclosure (m). But the dismissal of a redemption action for want of prosecution has not the effect of a decree for foreclosure, and the mortgagor may bring another action for redemption (n). The dismissal of an action for the redemption of an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds is not equivalent to a foreclosure, because in that case the judgment of foreclosure would direct the execution of a conveyance and the mere dismissal of the action to redeem would not have that effect (o). Where a second mortgagee brings action to redeem the first mortgagee and to foreclose the mortgagor, and the second mortgagee fails to redeem, the action will be dismissed as against both the second mortgagee and the mortgagor with costs (p).

Rule 488 is as follows:

488. In a redemption action where the plaintiff is declared foreclosed, directions may be given either by the final order foreclosing the plaintiff, or by subsequent orders, that all necessary inquiries be made, accounts taken and proceedings had for redemption or foreclosure, or redemption or sale, as against any subsequent encumbrancers, or for the adjustment of the relative rights and liabilities of the original defendants as among themselves.

(k) Faulkner v. Bolton, 1835, 7 Sim. 319.

(l) Collinson v. Jeffery, [18%] 1 Ch. 644. As to extension of time for redemption in an action for foreclosure or sale, see chapter 24, Sec. 244.

(m) Cholmley v. Countess Dowager of Oxford, 1741, 2 Atk. 267; Bishop of Winchester v. Paine, 1805, 11 Ves. 194; Inman v. Wearing,. 1850, 3 DeG. & S. 729; Cornwall v. Henriod, 1866, 12 Gr. 338.

(n) Hansard v. Hardy, 1812, 18 Ves. 455.

(o) Marshall v. Shrewsbury, 1875, L.R. 10 Ch. 250.

(p) Hallettv. Furze, 1885, 31 Ch.D. 312.

Where a second mortgagee sues for redemption and makes default in paying at the time appointed either the mortgagor or the first mortgagee has the right to have a day appointed for redemption of the first mortgage by the mortgagor. If neither avails himself of this right and the first mortgagee obtains an order simply dismissing the second mortgagee's action, he will not be deprived of his costs of a subsequent action to foreclose the first mortgage (q).

In an action for redemption the plaintiff is not entitled, without the mortgagee's consent, to a sale, but if the mortgagee under rule 481 brings in subsequent encumbrancers for the purpose of foreclosing them, it would seem that they have the ordinary right of defendants in a foreclosure action and may claim a sale on the usual terms (r).

A subsequent encumbrancer bringing action against a prior mortgagee is not entitled to a sale (s), unless the prior mortgagee consents or does not object (t). A subsequent encumbrancer may, however, have judgment for sale if the prior mortgagee consents thereto or does not object; but in that case the proceeds of the sale will be applied in satisfaction of the claims of the encumbrancers according to their priorities, and the subsequent encumbrancer will not be entitled to any priority in respect of his costs even if the fund prove insufficient

(q) McKinnon v. Anderson, 1871, 18 Gr. 684. As to subsequent accounts and appointment of a new day for redemption, see chapter 24, Action for Foreclosure or Sale, Sec. 241.

(r) Holmested, Ontario Judicature Act, 4th ed., p. 1071; see chapter 24, Action for Foreclosure or Sale, Sec. 245, and rule 462 there quoted.

(s) McDougall v. Campbell, 1881/6 Can. S.C.R. 502.

(t) Grange v. Barber, 1868, 2 Chy. Ch. (Ont). 189.

(u) Grange v. Barber, supra.