Stay informed with the latest insights and updates

The OBA Construction & Infrastructure Section has recently had the benefit of RSJ Firestone and the Associate Judges generously granting their time to speak to members of the Executive regarding vacating motions and ex parte court. Their Honours have asked the Section Executive to make members aware of certain procedures regarding vacating motions, and to solicit input regarding the potential resumption of in-person court appearances (note the survey link at the bottom!).

Over the course of my career in construction law, I have come to understand this truth: it takes ten years to get good at something, and ten years to earn a good reputation. Importantly, they are not the same ten years. The OBA has generously asked me to reflect on a career in construction law. Whether you are three, thirteen, or thirty years into practice, I hope these reflections offer something useful, on both the practice of law and the life that comes with it.  

In the fast-paced world of construction, delays and disruption can pose significant challenges to project success. In this Breaking Down the Walls series, Gary Brummer, a partner at Margie Strub Construction Law LLP, and Jacob Lokash, an associate at the firm, draw upon their extensive legal expertise to explore the complexities of construction delays. They have collaborated with Thomas Certo, a managing director in the Construction Disputes and Advisory Group at Ankura Consulting Group LLC, whose insights into the technical aspects of delay analysis provide a comprehensive perspective on this critical issue.

When is “judicial review” not judicial review? When it’s judicial review  of an adjudicator’s determination under the Construction Act. Why is it not judicial review? Because the drafters of the Construction Act used the wrong term when they were otherwise borrowing wholesale from the test to set aside an arbitrator’s award under the Arbitration Act.

For reasons not entirely clear to me (except perhaps my longevity), our section editor has asked me to reflect upon my career and offer whatever pearls of wisdom I may have gleaned.

As requested by the Editor of our Construction and Infrastructure Newsletter, Jay Nathwani, these career reflections are written for inclusion in our Section’s Newsletter Reflections Series. I’m pleased to have been asked to participate, although somewhat reluctant to provide personal reflections. In setting the stage for my remarks I’ll focus briefly on some historical aspects of my career and particularly on the broad range of diverse opportunities that I encountered that enabled me, over the years, to expand the scope of my practice in Canada and internationally.

In the fast-paced world of construction, delays and disruption can pose significant challenges to project success and execution. Throw concurrent delays into the mix, and it can be challenging to assign responsibility. This article seeks to demystify these concepts as they relate to delay claims and provide the reader with some useful takeaways for use in practice.

The pending amendments to the Construction Act (“the Act”) include a new requirement for the annual release of holdback, without the right to set off against holdback. However, while implementing a number of significant changes to the Act, the Legislature elected not to close an identified gap in the Act related to Public Private Partnership (“P3”) projects. As a result, a significant issue is created in the context of mandatory annual holdback released on P3 projects in Ontario.

In the fast-paced world of construction, delays can pose significant challenges to project success. In this Breaking Down the Walls series we simplify the fundamentals of construction delays, providing readers with the necessary tools to proactively identify and assess delays on their own projects in Canada, and focus on the damages that are often claimed as a result of schedule delay.

The type of property interest a mining company has in the lands dictates the manner in which liens are preserved and perfected. Consequently, when liening lands on which a mine is located the paramount consideration is determining the nature of the owner’s interest in the mining claim.

This is the third article in the 2024-2025 Newsletter’s Reflections series, featuring reflections on extraordinary careers by senior counsel in the construction bar.

This is the second article in the 2024-2025 Newsletter’s Reflections series, featuring reflections on extraordinary careers by senior counsel in the construction bar.

Time is of the essence when it comes to the role of a delay expert in a construction dispute. With cases increasingly involving vast amounts of data, AI has become a formidable tool for delay experts. However, AI tools are not without their limitations. Human oversight is still crucial to ensure both reasonableness and accuracy in legal proceedings.  

Once lien rights are extinguished, they are extinguished forever. After a lien is first registered on title, does a withdrawal of the Claim for Lien instrument forever extinguish those lien rights? In Gay Company Limited v. 962332 Ontario Inc., 2023 ONSC 6023, survival of the claimant’s lien rights turned on this question.

An overview of the ways in which environmental, social and governance standards positively affect owners, builders, end-users, and society as a whole.

Ontario is now a little over four years into the new prompt payment requirements under the Construction Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30. While there have been many articles on the written requirements set out in the new Part I.1 of the Act, not much is set in stone as far as the implementation and enforcement of these new provisions. More particularly, some members of the construction industry are finding it hard to understand and follow the requirements pertaining to Notices of Non-Payment.

On November 10, 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its much-anticipated decision in the matter of R. v. Greater Sudbury (City). The decision is noteworthy in its expanding, in a significant way, the health and safety obligations of an “owner” of a construction project under Ontario’s Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O., 1990, c. O.1.