Elizabeth Townhouses Ltd. v. Sigurdson

Elizabeth Townhouses Ltd. v. Sigurdson

For s.23(2) purposes 'abandonment' requires a permanent cessation of work with the intent not to complete; temporary stoppage or change of ownership does not trigger the 31‑day running, therefore the lien filed by the materialman was timely and the claim amount was properly awarded.

Citation
[1975] 2 SCR 449
Parties
Defendant/appellant (owner): Elizabeth Townhouses Ltd.; Trustee/defendant/appellant: Harold S. Sigurdson (Trustee in Bankruptcy of Elizabeth Townhouses Ltd.); Plaintiff/respondent (materialman): Dieleman Planer Company Ltd.
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 October 1974
Procedural Posture
Appeal (supreme Court of Canada) / Final Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Abandonment, Statutory Time Limits for Liens, Interpretation of Mechanics' Lien Act S.23(2), Completion of Improvement, Change of Ownership
Source Language
English
Property Law Construction Law Bankruptcy Mechanics' Liens Priorities and Hypothecs Abandonment Statutory Time Limits for Liens Interpretation of Mechanics' Lien Act S.23(2) +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elizabeth Townhouses Ltd.

Defendant/appellant (owner)

Harold S. Sigurdson (Trustee in Bankruptcy of Elizabeth Townhouses Ltd.)

Trustee/defendant/appellant

Dieleman Planer Company Ltd.

Plaintiff/respondent (materialman)

Procedural Posture

Appeal (supreme Court of Canada) / Final Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for a mechanics' lien was filed within the statutory time limit in s.23(2) of the Mechanics' Lien Act
  2. 2 What constitutes 'abandonment' of an improvement for purposes of s.23(2)
  3. 3 Whether cessation of work or change of ownership amounts to abandonment

Ratio Decidendi

For s.23(2) purposes 'abandonment' requires a permanent cessation of work with the intent not to complete; temporary stoppage or change of ownership does not trigger the 31‑day running, therefore the lien filed by the materialman was timely and the claim amount was properly awarded.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to respondent