The defendants brought a motion under section 47 of the Construction Act to discharge the plaintiff's construction lien, vacate the certificate of action, and dismiss the action.
The motion was based on four grounds: the oral contract was prohibited by the Statute of Frauds, lack of corroboration under the Evidence Act section 13, lack of certainty in the contract's essential elements, and no claim for unjust enrichment.
The court dismissed the motion, ruling that the Construction Act is a complete code for construction liens, allowing for oral contracts as an exception to the Statute of Frauds.
It also found that the Evidence Act section 13 did not apply as the action was not against the deceased's estate, the oral contract had sufficient certainty, and the unjust enrichment claim was an alternative remedy not subject to a section 47 motion.
Costs were awarded to the plaintiff.