Law360 Canada ( February 4, 2025, 9:16 AM EST) -- Appeal by appellant of application judge’s order upholding validity of a builder’s lien and application by appellant to vacate a lien. The respondent supplied glass panes for a construction project on the appellant's property. A lien was registered by the respondent for unpaid amounts. The appellant argued that the lien was registered too late and should be vacated, as the last glass pane was not used for the project. The appellant sought an order vacating the lien upon payment of the amount of the lien into the appellant’s counsel’s trust account as security in place of the lien. The application was heard and a consent order directed that upon payment of a sum of money to be held in trust by the appellant’s counsel (the funds), the lien would be vacated, and the funds should stand as security for the lien (the consent order). The application judge found the lien valid and ordered the funds to be paid to the respondent. The respondent submitted that the finding that the lien was valid was interlocutory, and the direction on payment of the funds to the respondent was a final decision. However, the appellant submitted that the application judge erred in law by failing to apply the correct legal test for vacating a lien. The appellant also contended that the application judge erred in finding that the lien was registered in time. It was argued that the last glass pane supplied was never used to improve the project and, therefore, could not be used to extend the time for registering the lien....