Articles 2023

Nortown was contracted to Burl 9 and Intracorp separately to provide plumbing work on their respective housing subdivision projects, each of which contained several lots.

On April 13, 2016, the Canadian Senate passed the first reading of Bill S-224, An Act respecting payments made under construction contracts, to be known as the Canada Prompt Payment Act. On April 19, Bill S-224 was put on the Order Paper for second reading.

In Employment Professionals Canada Inc. v. Steel Design the Court once again deals with the thorny question of limitation periods where business people decide to forebear on their legal rights, this time in the context of a “prevenient arrangement”. Where labour or materials are supplied under an arrangement or understanding that supplies are provided at a going rate per hour or per item for one project, even if they are not ordered at one time, this is a “prevenient arrangement”.

The long, 32 year wait to reform Ontario’s Construction Lien Act may soon be over. The Province’s independent expert review of the Act is expected to submit its final report and recommendations at the end of April.

The Ontario Court of Appeal in the recent decision, Keenan v. Canac Kitchens Ltd 2016 ONCA 79 grappled with a frequent issue facing construction companies that often blur the line between independent contractors and employees.

Given the continued market interest in the P3 model and the complex nature of the contractual relationships in P3 projects, the Construction and Infrastructure Law Section of the OBA hosted the “Infrastructure Development Primer II: Into the Trenches” at the end of March, building on the inaugural success of last year's Construction and Infrastructure Section's "Infrastructure Development Primer".

A common point of negotiation in construction industry contracts is whether the standard of negligence should be “negligence” or “gross negligence”.

Efforts have raised the bar in a collective effort to prevent injury or death in the workplace. Nevertheless, the Metron decisions remain a stark reminder of the potential liability faced by companies, their directors and individuals directing the work of others under the Code and occupational health and safety legislation.

An interesting case that may be of interest to Ontario lawyers was released recently on February 3, 2016. In it, the UK Technology and Construction Court (TCC) enforced an adjudication award made less than three months earlier on November 18, 2015 in the United Kingdom.

On Friday, February 5, as part of its Institute 2016 program, the Ontario Bar Association hosted a presentation entitled “Good Faith in Construction: Where We Are Post Bhasin”.