Call us: (905) 366 9700
Legal Blog:
Jul
28
2013
Back Door
We write this in a room in a residence at Queen’s College, University of Cambridge, the home of Erasmus, Isaac Newton, Watson & Crick, and 89 Nobel Prize winners. Unfortunately, their genius has not rubbed off on us, but the lectures we have attended have been very interesting.
Continue Reading >Jul
02
2013
How do I vacate the registration of a lien that is for an excessive amount?
Pursuant to Subsection 44(2) of the Construction Lien Act, a person can bring a motion with notice to the lien claimant to obtain an order vacating the registration of a claim for lien upon the payment into court or the posting of security for a reasonable amount. The reasonable amount will usually be equal to the value of the lien as determined by the court plus 25% of that amount or $50,000.00, whichever is less.
Continue Reading >Jul
01
2013
Priority (2) Appeal
You will recall in the Wellington case, we stated that the amount of the bond was irrelevant to the ultimate liability of the mortgagee under the Construction Lien Act. This point had been made – not for the first time and, it seems, not for the last time – in Basic Drywall Inc. v. 1539304 Ontario Inc., which we discussed in our September 2012 newsletter.
Continue Reading >Jul
01
2013
Early Release
We could be discussing prisoner parole or maybe even sexual dysfunction. Alas, such is not the case. We refer to the early release of statutory holdback and its effect on priorities under the Construction Lien Act. Can payment of some of the holdback to subs who have long finished their work on an extended project turn into a disaster for the payer? Such was the situation, with a twist, in Wellington Plumbing & Heating Ltd. v. Villa Nicolini Inc., a 2012 decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
Continue Reading >Jul
01
2013
Privy
The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (the “BIA”) does not allow debtors to shed their obligations with full impunity. It has some sections that offer creditors respite when the trustee in bankruptcy can prove that the bankrupt and others have been playing fast and loose to remove assets from the bankrupt’s estate. Section 96 deals with reviewable transactions. The Ontario Court of Appeal had occasion to interpret and apply its predecessor, section 100, in Bank of Montreal v. ELO4, a 2012 decision.
Continue Reading >