43 total
No costs awarded where motion result was mixed and opposition was reasonable.
Following a motion concerning the vacating of construction liens upon posting reduced security, the moving parties sought partial indemnity costs of approximately $7,700.
The court considered the circumstances of the motion, including short service of the original motion, the fact that the ultimate relief ordered differed from the relief originally sought, and the novelty of the reduced-security structure proposed under the Construction Lien Act.
The court found the responding lien claimants’ opposition to be reasonable and noted that alternative statutory mechanisms were available to the moving parties without requiring the motion.
Given the mixed success and the conduct of the moving parties, the court declined to award costs.
Court permits partial lien vacating with mixed cash and land security.
Mortgagees brought a motion under ss. 44(2) and 78 of the Construction Lien Act seeking to vacate five construction liens from title to condominium units by posting alternative security.
The development consisted of 26 commercial condominium units, most of which had already been sold, while five units remained unsold.
Lien claimants argued that security equal to nearly the full amount of the liens should be posted in cash from sale proceeds.
The court held that the mortgagees’ proposal—posting partial cash security while leaving the liens on title to the remaining unsold units—provided more than adequate combined land and cash security and better preserved potential equity by reducing mortgage debt and accumulating interest.
The court ordered the liens vacated from the sold units upon posting security while remaining on the unsold units pending further order.
Appeal from summary judgment for delivered goods dismissed where appellant had no evidence disputing delivery.
The appellants appealed a summary judgment granted in favour of the respondent for delivered goods.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no trial was required as the appellants acknowledged they had no evidence the goods were not delivered.
The court also found no basis to reduce the agreed-upon interest rate or to stay the judgment pending the trial of the appellants' counterclaim.