Va. Code » Title 43. Mechanics' and Certain Other Liens » Chapter 1. Mechanics' and Materialmen's Liens
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 43-18 (2026)

Lien of general contractor to inure to benefit of subcontractor

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The perfected lien of a general contractor on any building or structure shall inure to the benefit of any subcontractor, and of any person performing labor or furnishing materials to a subcontractor who has not perfected a lien on such building or structure, provided such subcontractor, or person performing labor or furnishing materials shall give written notice of his claim against the general contractor, or subcontractor, as the case may be, to the owner or his agent before the amount of such lien is actually paid off or discharged.

Code 1919, § 6434.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1960–2006 · leading case: Rosser v. Cole, 379 S.E.2d 323 (Va. 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rosser v. Cole, 379 S.E.2d 323 (Va. 1989). · cites it 2× “After reasonable notice to the lien claimant and any party to whom the benefit of the lien would inure and who has given notice as provided in § 43-18 of the Code of Virginia, the court shall hold a hearing and determine the validity of the lien.”
Commonwealth Mech. Contractors, Inc. v. Stand. Fed. Sav. & Loan, 281 S.E.2d 811 (Va. 1981). · cites it 2× “See Code § 43-18. 4 Both opinions implied that the statute of limitations would have been tolled if the lienors had been parties to the third parties’ suit within the prescribed period.”
BRITT CONST., INC. v. Magazzine Clean, LLC, 623 S.E.2d 886 (Va. 2006). “After reasonable notice to the lien claimant and any party to whom the benefit of the lien would inure and who has given notice as provided in § 43-18 of the Code of Virginia, the court shall hold a hearing and determine the validity of the lien.”
VNB Mortg. Corp. v. Lone Star Indus., Inc., 209 S.E.2d 909 (Va. 1974). · cites it 2× “The wording of Article 7 appears to have been directed to statutes which permit the filing of a mechanic’s lien only by the general contractor, rather than to statutes such as Virginia’s which permit the lien to be filed not only by the general contractor but also independently…”
PIC Constr. Co. v. First Union Nat'l Bank of North Carolina, 241 S.E.2d 804 (Va. 1978). “After reasonable notice to the lien claimant and any party to whom the benefit of the lien would inure and who has given notice as provided in § 43-18 of the Code of Virginia, the court shall hold a hearing and determine the validity of the lien.”
Knight v. Ferrante, 117 S.E.2d 283 (Va. 1960). “While under Code, § 43-18, the subcontractor may claim through the general contractor, he is not obliged to do so.”
Prime Constr. Corp. v. Riverside Dev. Jt. Venture A-1 (In re Prime Constr. Corp.), 156 B.R. 176 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 1993). “The issue in these cases was whether § 43-18 alone creates a trust on behalf of labor and material claimants.”
W. C. Cochran Constr. Co. v. Univ. Ctr. Residential Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 31 Va. Cir. 548 (Loudoun Cir. Ct. 1992). · cites it 2× “*549 Although subcontractors have brought separate suits to enforce their mechanic’s liens, some have sought to perfect their liens under Section 43-18 (lien of general contractor to inure to benefit of subcontractor).”
Robinson v. Herrell Constr. Co., 7 Va. Cir. 308 (Winchester Cir. Ct. 1986). · cites it 4× “The subcontractor, under the provisions of Code § 43-18 (Repl. Vol. 1970) may rely upon the general contractor’s lien or, under the provisions of Code §§ 43-3, -4 and -7 (Repl.”
Lower v. Cranch, 32 Va. Cir. 110 (Loudoun Cir. Ct. 1993). · cites it 2× “§ 43-18, Code of Virginia, as amended. Petitioners seek to bar *111 recovery as to such subcontractors based upon the general principle that: the amount for which a subcontractor may perfect a lien under this section shall not exceed the amount in which the owner is indebted to…”
Belle View Condo. Unit Owners' Ass'n v. Drytech, Inc., 65 Va. Cir. 169 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2004). “After reasonable notice to the lien claimant and any party to whom the benefit of the lien would inure and who has given notice as provided in § 43-18 of the Code of Virginia, the court shall hold a hearing and determine the validity of the lien.”
Home Lumber Corp. v. Karim & Meador, Inc., 29 Va. Cir. 491 (Botetourt Cir. Ct. 1976). “After reasonable notice to the lien, claimant and any party to whom the benefit of the lien would inure and who has given notice as provided in § 43-18 of the Code of Virginia, the court shall hold a hearing and determine the validity of the lien.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.