Happy Thanksgiving! Thank you for all of your support this year. We look forward to building with you in 2025!
-
Happy Thanksgiving!
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
It’s not fair! Or is it? The Divisional Court Consider Procedural Fairness of Adjudication Determination in Blackstone Paving and Construction Ltd. v. Barrie (City of).
While there is no appeal from adjudicator's determinations under the Construction Act (the "Act"), the court's jurisdiction to grant judicial review is set out in s. 13.18(5) of the Act.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Construct Legal's Small Firms Associate Event
Last week, Construct Legal hosted its first-ever Small Firms Associate Event, bringing together talented associates from small firms across Toronto.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Due Diligence and Safety: Guidance for Project Owners in R v Greater Sudbury (City)
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice’s August 23, 2024, decision in R v Greater Sudbury (City) provides much-needed clarity on the ability of owners to rely on due diligence as a defence to claims brought under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (“OHSA”).
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Understanding Flow-Through Costs in Construction Contexts: Insights from Walsh Construction v. Toronto Transit Commission
There have been very few Canadian cases dealing with flow-through claims. Fortunately, the recent case of Walsh Construction v Toronto Transit Commission et al., 2024 ONSC 2782, provides valuable guidance for parties advancing flow-through claims in construction contexts.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
An order to pay is an order to pay – payment into lawyer’s trust not sufficient for adjudication order
In the decision of High Tech Power Inc. v. BDA Inc., 2024 ONSC 4327, the court recently re-affirmed that adjudications under the Construction Act are to be upheld and that a party ordered by an adjudicator to pay money must make that payment to the successful party.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Procedural Unfairness results in New Adjudication Hearing
In this case1, Jamrik sought judicial review of an adjudication determination ordering it to pay the amount of $564,812.87 under the prompt payment regime. The Divisional Court held that the Adjudicator did not make the factual findings needed to determine whether the contract was complete and consequently whether the Adjudicator had jurisdiction to hear the dispute. The Divisional Court quashed the decision and remitted it back to be heard by a new adjudicator.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Compare and Contract: CCDC 5A & CCDC 5B
CCDC-style agreements are used for many construction projects in Ontario. Two of the more common base-style agreements, the CCDC 5A and CCDC 5B, present very different project delivery methods from both the owner and construction manager perspective.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Avoiding Disputes about Dispute Resolution – The importance of careful drafting of dispute resolution and priority clauses in construction contracts
Parties to construction contracts must carefully consider their dispute resolution and contract documents' priority clauses. In our latest blog entry, Paul Conrod discusses a recent Ontario case involving the arbitration clause contained in the CCDC 14 Design-Build Stipulated Price Contract.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
MGW-Homes Design Inc. v Pasqualino: Ontario Court of Appeal clarifies appeal route from an adjudicator’s determination.
The Ontario Court of Appeal confirms that the proper route of appeal from an adjudicator’s determination is to the Divisional Court.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
You can run, you can hide but you can’t escape the Construction Act.
Sometimes a construction contract has terms that attempt to remove requirements and remedies available under the Construction Act. For example, the contract states that a party cannot lien or a party has to pay the full amount of an invoice without the statutory 10% holdback. Those terms are not enforceable as parties cannot contract out of their obligations under the Construction Act.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
TBD for the LOC: The Court Adjourns Motion Regarding Letters of Credit to Vacate Claims for Lien
Vacating a lien from title using a letter of credit as security
Vacating the registration of a claim for lien from title to a property is a common and routine procedure in construction litigation.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
#Lawntrepreneurs
Episode #4 – Law and TechEpisode drop!
Thinking about going out on your own or modernizing your firm? One of the toughest decisions to make is about the software to choose. And now this software is more than just docketing, it involves AI too.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Reduce Security Posted into Court to Vacate a Lien by Making Section 28 Payments
Key takeaway
If payments are made in accordance with section 28 of the Construction Act, those payments may be considered to reduce the security posted to vacate a lien. Using section 28 to make direct payments to subcontracts, including for holdback, may be an effective way to flow funds that are owing and reduce security posted for a lien.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Adjudication and Construction Contracts: Contractual Dos and Don’ts
Adjudications are seeing more use as a quick and efficient dispute resolution tool for Ontario-based construction projects. The fundamental components of adjudication are established in the Construction Act, but savvy industry participants should be aware of the impact construction contracts can (and cannot) have on adjudications.1
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Don’t Bury Your Head in the Soil: Excess Soil Regulations Webinar
Construction projects often generate excess soil and with that comes a statutory regime that needs to be complied with to avoid liability. Despite these laws coming into legal force and effect in phases over the last four years, there is still a lot of confusion about Ontario’s excess soil laws.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
A Due Diligence Reminder: Cost Implications for Frivolous, Vexatious and Abusive Liens.
2708320 Ontario Ltd. cob Viceroy Homes v Jia Development Inc.,1 provides helpful guidance on the interpretation of frivolous, vexatious and abusive liens under the Construction Act. It also examines the cost implications for stakeholders in construction lien proceedings who register liens that are baseless or grossly excessive.2
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Not So Fast, Default Judgment!
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2024/2024onsc746/2024onsc746.html
Issued a statement of claim? Served the claim in accordance with the Rules? No defence delivered within the time limit and now you want to move to note the defendants in default and obtain default judgment? Not so fast! In Akhtar v. Taha Development, 2024 ONSC 746, the court outlines the various factors it considers when deciding whether to grant default judgment against defendants who have been noted in default.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
CONTRACTORS: Don’t Just Notice the Notice of Non-Payment
If you receive a Notice of Non-Payment (form 1.1)1 from the owner, you are being notified that the owner will not pay you for some or all of your proper invoice. You then have a short window of time to take action.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »
-
Construct Legal Social
The team at Construct Legal has a jar for paying quarters when we say certain phrases that will not be posted on LinkedIn.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE »