Articles

Statutory adjudication of construction disputes in Ontario is in its early stages. Because of the section 87.3(4) transition provisions of the Construction Act (the “Act”), adjudication does not apply to most current contracts and subcontracts; but as new projects are bid, adjudication will gradually become the norm in the province.

The Ontario Court of Appeal in CM Callow Inc. v Zollinger, 2018 ONCA 896 (“Callow”) recently rendered a decision that could have important consequences for parties seeking to terminate commercial agreements. Specifically, Callow may have significant ramifications for the law of good faith in Ontario, and in particular with respect to the duty of honest performance first recognized in Bhasin v Hrynew, 2014 SCC 71.

The new Act’s provisions contain gaps and inconsistencies which will in our view lead to confusion and potential problems going forward. We have identified some of them, below. Many will no doubt be addressed in due course, although many most likely will not.

Significant changes to the Construction Act came into force in Ontario on October 1, 2019.  While prompt payment and adjudication have been receiving most of the attention, a significant change to how construction liens are preserved in respect of municipal premises should not be overlooked.

While blockchain originated to serve as the public transaction ledger of cryptocurrency, the technology is now being explored for other purposes. It is only a matter of time before the construction industry engages in earnest with blockchain and benefits from the technology.

For the first time, the Ontario Dispute Adjudication for Construction Contracts ("ODACC”) previewed five adjudication processes, costs and an example adjudication timeline—all as part of the application package to become an adjudicator. This first look surveys a number of potential adjudication processes and highlights the summary nature of the regime as envisioned by the Act.

Blake v. Blake is an important cautionary tale for all lawyers: read all of the articles that your firm publishes. A judge may make a factual inference that you know about the case your firm wrote about, especially if you practice in a specialized firm.

Case comment on the Ontario Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Reaction Distributing Inc. v. Algonquin Highlands (Township), 2019 ONCA 433.