Is a safe connected to a 24-hour monitor an improvement under the Builders’ Lien Act?

In Chubb Security Safes v. Larken Industries Ltd., [1990] B.C.J. No. 26 (S.C.), a two-ton safe connected to a 24-hour monitor was held not to constitute an improvement and the Builders’ Lien Act was therefore held not to apply. The definition of “improvement” in the Builders’ Lien Act included anything added to, in, on or under land, and attached to it or intended to become part of it. The court concluded that the safe was equipment that was not integral to the structure of the building. The court said that the test was objective: would a reasonable supplier conclude that the chattel was supplied and installed for the enhancement of the land or simply for the use and convenience of a user of the land? The method of attachment, the degree to which the land or buildings had to be adapted to accommodate the item and its permanence must be weighed in answering that question.