4 total
Construction lien actions stayed because bankrupt sole director lacked legal authority to direct the corporate plaintiff.
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.
Developer breached demolition contract by withholding progress payment over disputed crush size; contractor's lien upheld.
The plaintiff demolition contractor registered a construction lien after abandoning the site due to the defendant developer's failure to pay a progress draw.
The dispute centered on whether the contract required crushing concrete to 3-inch minus or 3/4-inch minus, and whether the plaintiff was responsible for removing asphalt and imported materials.
The court found the defendant breached the contract by failing to pay the progress draw, the contract specified a 3-inch minus crush, and the lien was registered in time.
After accounting for payments and proven backcharges, the defendant was ordered to pay the plaintiff $81,271.93.
Board confirms union retains non-ICI bargaining rights; Minister has authority to appoint conciliation officer.
The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 107 of the Labour Relations Act regarding whether the trade union held bargaining rights for the employer's carpenters in all sectors other than the industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) sector in Board Area 3, and whether the union's request for a conciliation officer was proper.
The employer argued that the union never had non-ICI bargaining rights, or alternatively, had abandoned them.
The Board found that the original 1965 collective agreement granted the union bargaining rights for all sectors, and that the union had not abandoned these rights despite a period of inactivity, as the employer had not performed non-ICI work in the area during that time.
The Board concluded that the union held the bargaining rights and the Minister had the authority to appoint a conciliation officer.
Board ordered a preliminary sector determination under section 150 before hearing the construction grievance merits.
The applicant union referred a construction industry grievance to the Board alleging the respondent employer improperly subcontracted concrete forming work.
The respondent and intervening unions requested a preliminary determination under section 150 of the Labour Relations Act as to whether the work fell within the industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) sector.
The Board granted the request, finding it appropriate to determine the sector issue before hearing the merits of the grievance, given the potential illegality of the collective agreement if it purported to cover ICI work.
