A.H.M.D. Nawaz, J.

1. The pithy question for determination in this case is whether a prior mortgage bond can extend its ambit to secure the repayment of a loan granted by a bank subsequent to its execution. It is a well-established principle that a security, such as a mortgage, typically secures both past and present liabilities. However, the inquiry is whether such a security can validly encompass a contingent liability. Given the facts in the instant appeal, can a mortgage bond executed in 2015 serve as security for a loan advanced by the same bank in 2016?

2. This issue draws attention to the intricate and often labyrinthine clauses embedded in standard form mortgage bonds. The ingenuity of their construction serves as a testament to the protective mechanisms that favor financial institutions. Indeed, one might be inclined to echo Lord Macnaghten's observation that "no one…by the light of nature ever understood an English mortgage of real estate.", Samuel v Jarrah Timber and Wood Paving Corporation (1904) AC 323, at p.326.

3. The Defendant-Appellant (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant" or the "Commercial Bank") extended banking facilities to the Plaintiff- Respondent (herei