C. Kellowan

The defendant moved to stay the plaintiff's construction lien actions and discharge the liens, arguing that the plaintiff corporation lacked a controlling mind after its sole director became bankrupt.

The court found that neither the bankrupt director nor a secured creditor holding a share pledge agreement had the legal authority under the Business Corporations Act to direct the litigation.

The court stayed the actions but granted a 30-day cure period for the plaintiff to rectify the corporate governance issue, and ordered the plaintiff to post $150,000 in security for costs as a precondition to lifting the stay.

The plaintiff in a construction lien action sought leave under s. 67(2) of the Construction Lien Act to bring an interlocutory motion to compel answers to refusals from a cross-examination.

The cross-examination was on an affidavit sworn in support of the defendant's pending motion for security for costs.

The Master denied leave, finding that the proposed refusals motion would not expedite the resolution of the issues and was not necessary for the fair disposition of the pending security for costs motion.

The appellant builder appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) decision that directed Tarion Warranty Corporation to pay the respondent homeowners $300,000 for a defective concrete foundation.

The appellant argued the LAT erred in its procedural rulings and in its assessment of the warranty claim.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the LAT's decisions were reasonable and based on concessions made by the appellant during the hearing.

Costs of $10,000 were awarded to Tarion.