Empire Electric Ltd. v. Button and Noseworthy, (1976) 11 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 92 (NFDC)

• Case Date: March 09, 1976
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (1976), 11 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 92 (NFDC)

Empire Electric v. Button (1976), 11 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 92 (NFDC);

    22 A.P.R. 92

MLB headnote and full text

Empire Electric Limited v. Button and Noseworthy

Indexed As: Empire Electric Ltd. v. Button and Noseworthy

Newfoundland District Court

Judicial District of St. John's East

Steele, D.C.J.

March 9, 1976.

Summary:

This case arose out of the plaintiff's claim for the price of a contract for the installation of the electrical system in a new house. The plaintiff electrician contracted with the defendants to install the electrical system in their new home for a lump sum of $1,750.00 payable upon full completion. The defendants were dissatisfied with the plaintiff's work, because of several defects and omissions. The defendants paid the plaintiff $1,000.00, but refused to pay more. The plaintiff brought an action for the contract price plus extra work agreed upon.

The Newfoundland District Court allowed the action in part. The District Court found that the contract had been substantially completed by the plaintiff and that the plaintiff was entitled to the contract price plus extras less the cost of remedying the defects and omissions in his work.

Building Contracts - Topic 1743

Completion - Substantial completion - What constitutes substantial completion - The plaintiff electrician contracted to install the electrical system for the defendant's new house for a lump sum upon completion - There were several defects and omissions in the plaintiff's work and the defendants refused full payment - The Newfoundland District Court set out the rule of substantial completion - The District Court found that the contract was substantially completed by the plaintiff and that he was entitled to the contract price less the cost of remedying the defects and omissions in his work - See paragraphs 23-36.

Building Contracts - Topic 3568

Liability of builder - Damages - Measure of damages - Reinstatement cost of remedying defects and omissions - The plaintiff electrician substantially completed the electrical system for a new house, but left defects and omissions in the work - The Newfoundland District Court held that the plaintiff was entitled to the contract price less the cost of remedying the defects and omissions in his work - See paragraphs 37-39.

Cases Noticed:

Williams v. Pre-Cut Builders Limited and Dohert, (1975), 12 N.S.R.(2d) 38, appld. [para. 25].

Markland Associates Limited v. Lohnes, (1975), 11 N.S.R.(2d) 181, appld. [para. 27].

Ocean Steel and Construction Limited v. Kenney Construction Co. Ltd. (1972), (1973), 5 N.S.R.(2d) 167; 31 D.L.R.(3d) 441, appld. [para. 28].

Hoenig v. Isaacs, [1952] 2 All E.R. 176, appld. [para. 28].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Cheshire and Fifoot, The Law of Contract (8th Ed.), p. 524. [para. 26].

Hudson, Building and Engineering Contracts (9th Ed.), p. 192. [p ara. 25].

Counsel:

G. Horan, for the plaintiff;

D. Day, for the defendants.

This case was heard on March 9, 1976, at St. John's, Newfoundland, before STEELE, D.C.J., of the Newfoundland District Court of the Judicial District of St. John's East.

STEELE, D.C.J., delivered the following judgment: