Karey Dhirani

The plaintiffs requested an amendment to the court's previous reasons dismissing their request for injunctive relief, citing an error in a transcript regarding whether the Law Society of Upper Canada was investigating the plaintiffs.

The defendant conceded the transcript error but argued the dismissal should be maintained.

The court corrected the factual error in its supplementary reasons but declined to amend its previous order, finding that the plaintiffs' case for injunctive relief was still not ironclad enough to warrant the exceptional remedy sought.

The owner of a residential subdivision development brought a motion under s. 44(2) of the Construction Lien Act to vacate multiple construction liens upon posting security.

The project contractor had abandoned the project and later became bankrupt, leaving several subcontractor lien claims totaling approximately $2.9 million.

The court held that the owner’s exposure to subcontractor liens could not exceed the amount potentially owed to the contractor under the contract.

After resolving a dispute regarding corrected payment certificates issued by the project consultant, the court determined the correct unpaid certified amount and fixed the security required to vacate the liens accordingly.

The court also determined that security for costs should be calculated based on the owner’s potential contractual exposure rather than the aggregate value of all lien claims.