The defendants moved to declare the plaintiff's construction lien expired, discharge the lien, vacate related registrations, and dismiss the action for delay.
The plaintiff conceded lien expiry but opposed dismissal of its joined breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims.
The court found that Rule 24.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure does not apply in lien actions due to inconsistency with the Construction Act, but exercised its broad discretion under s. 47 of the Act to dismiss for delay.
The action had not progressed beyond the pleadings stage in over four years, the statement of claim had not been served, and no adequate explanation for the delay was provided.
The court dismissed the action in its entirety and awarded substantial indemnity costs to the defendants.
