The Lazy Lion Restaurant was owned and operated by Leon Lowe. Although the property upon which the restaurant was located was owned by Lowe, it was also subject to a mortgage in favour of Ursula Aust. Likewise, although Lowe owned most of the equipment that was located within the restaurant, the main oven was subject to a conditional sales agreement that Lowe had created with Jeremy Froelich. (Froelich did not register that agreement under any personal property security legislation, as discussed in Chapter 22.) That conditional sales agreement stated that while Lowe was immediately entitled to possession and use of the oven, Froelich retained ownership until the purchase price was paid in full. The agreement also stated that if Lowe failed to make a monthly payment, Froelich was entitled to re-acquire possession of the oven and to sue for damages. For reasons of safety and efficiency, Lowe had the oven bolted to the floor and actually incorporated into the adjacent wall. Exhaust shafts and electrical cords that were attached to the oven were similarly firmly built into the surrounding area.

The Lazy Lion unfortunately failed within two months of opening. That created a number of difficulties. On a personal level, Lowe was financially ruined. As a result, he was unable to meet his monthly payment requirements under the conditional sales agreement with Froelich. And for the same reason, he defaulted on his mortgage payments to Aust. Before Froelich was able to take any action, Aust began proceedings to exercise her right of foreclosure under the mortgage and to acquire ownership of the property (as explained in Chapter 15). A dispute consequently has arisen between Froelich and Aust. Aust claims that she is entitled to the entire mortgaged property, including the oven. Froelich claims that he continues to own the oven under the terms of the conditional sales contract and that he is consequently entitled to re-acquire possession of it. Who is right? Explain your answer.