In Q West Van Homes Inc. v. Fran-Car Aluminum Inc., 2007 BCSC 823 the chambers judge deducted a claim for overtime when calculating the security to be paid into court on a s. 24 application on the basis that the overtime was in the nature of overhead and financing charges:
… it is my opinion that the $312,000 overtime charges claimed … do not reflect the price of products but, rather, are more akin to increased overhead and financing charges which do not properly form part of a claim of lien.
(Q West Van Homes Inc. v. Fran-Car Aluminum Inc., 2007 BCSC 823 at para. 9).
The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that such deduction should not have been made when determining the security to be paid, but the issue of whether the claim for overtime was properly lienable should have been left for the trial judge:
The Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 11th ed., defines “overtime” as “time worked in addition to one’s normal working hours”. In my view, whether this could be equated to overhead or financing charges is a matter that should have been left for trial and the judge erred in deducting it at this stage of the proceeding.
(Q West Van Homes Inc. v. Fran-Car Aluminum Inc., 2008 BCCA 366 at para. 54).