Background: The legal dispute in focused on the validity of a mechanics' lien under the Mechanics' Lien Act. Cana Management Limited sought to have the lien declared invalid, while SMI Construction Ltd. argued for its validity.

Legal Issues: The central issue was whether Ventura, a third party in whose name the property was leased, qualified as an "owner" under the Mechanics' Lien Act, thus affecting the validity of the lien placed by SMI Construction Ltd. The determination hinged on interpreting whether Ventura met the criteria of having requested the work, or if the work was done on their behalf, with their consent, or for their direct benefit.

Held: The court found that Ventura did not qualify as an "owner" as they did not request the work, nor was the work performed for their direct benefit or on their behalf. Consequently, the mechanics' lien registered by SMI Construction Ltd. against Ventura’s leasehold interest was declared invalid.

Costs and Awards: The judgment did not specify the total amount of costs awarded. However, it mentioned that Cana Management Limited could seek damages against SMI Construction Ltd. for the wrongful filing of the lien and costs on a solicitor-and-client basis, pending further proceedings.