Background:

• Bank-Strox, hired as a general contractor, had its contract terminated by Lugano and subsequently filed a construction lien against Lugano.
• The parties initially agreed to arbitrate the dispute, leading to a consent stay order to facilitate this process. However, the arbitration did not proceed.

Legal Issue:

• Lugano sought to lift the stay and dismiss the action due to delay, arguing under the old Construction Act and the lack of progress in the arbitration.

Court's Analysis and Decision:

• The court found both parties responsible for progressing the arbitration, emphasizing that the defendant (Lugano) bore greater responsibility, especially since it failed to plead in both the lien action and arbitration.
• The court noted Lugano’s inaction post-arbitration agreement and lack of efforts to advance the arbitration process.
• No substantial evidence of prejudice caused by the delay to Lugano was presented, nor was there evidence suggesting a fair trial could not occur despite the delay.
• The court was critical of Bank-Strox's inaction and poor response to the motion but decided that this did not justify granting Lugano’s motion to lift the stay and dismiss the action.

Outcome:

• The motion to lift the stay and dismiss the action for delay was dismissed.
• Neither party was awarded costs due to Lugano's lack of success and Bank-Strox’s inadequate response to the motion, with both parties bearing their own costs.