You are an Ontario lawyer. One day, an electrician-subcontractor comes into your office and complains. It seems as if the electrician made a contract with a general contractor who builds homes, and the electrician has yet to be paid for his services. The owner of the home has already paid the general contractor $300,000 to build the home. The electrician asks you if he may successfully obtain any money from the general contractor or the owner of the home. What do you tell him?

	A.	The electrician’s recourse is limited to the general contractor, and therefore must sue only the general contractor in court pursuant to Ontario’s contract law
	B.	Provided that the electrician promptly registered a lien pursuant to the Construction Lien Act after completing his services, the electrician’s sole recourse is against the owner of the home. The electrician is entitled to a pro-rated amount of the holdback (a pro-rated fraction of $30,000)
	C.	Provided that the electrician promptly registered a lien pursuant to the Construction Lien Act after completing his services, the electrician has recourse both against the general contractor and the owner’s holdback
	D.	Provided that the electrician promptly attached and perfected a secured interest pursuant to the Ontario PPSA after completing his services, the electrician has recourse both against the general contractor and the owner’s holdback

2.

Mr. Biggs, a successful businessman, guaranteed the debts of his corporation, Textile Industries (“Textile”). This guarantee made him personally responsible when Textile ran into financial difficulties. Someone sued Mr. Biggs and Textile and won in court. Textile went out of business, and Mr. Biggs was forced to claim personal bankruptcy. Shortly before his bankruptcy, he transferred his interest in the matrimonial home to his wife and continued to live there with her. The Court reversed the transfer. Why?

	A.	The transfer of the house to the wife was done to defeat or defraud the creditors and amounted to a fraudulent conveyance under the Fraudulent Conveyances Act
	B.	The transfer of the house to the wife was done to defeat or defraud the creditors and amounted to a fraudulent conveyance under the Fraudulent Conveyances Act, and it also amounted to an attached but unperfected transaction under the provincial PPSA
	C.	The transfer of the house to the wife amounted to a prohibited settlement under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act
	D.	The transfer of the house to the wife amounted to a prohibited settlement under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, and it was done to defeat or defraud the creditors and amounted to a fraudulent conveyance under the Fraudulent Conveyances Act

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

1 You are an Ontario lawyer One day an electriciansubcontractor comes into your office and complains ... View the full answer