H.T. Drywall Ltd. v. Carriage Holdings Ltd., (1979) 24 A.R. 68 (QB)

• Judge: Waite, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: November 29, 1979
• Citations: (1979), 24 A.R. 68 (QB)

H.T. Drywall Ltd. v. Carriage Holdings (1979), 24 A.R. 68 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

H.T. Drywall Ltd. v. Carriage Holdings Ltd.

(Q.B. 127700)

Indexed As: H.T. Drywall Ltd. v. Carriage Holdings Ltd.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Waite, J.

November 29, 1979.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Contracts - Topic 3664

Performance or breach - Repudiation - What constitutes - A general contractor asked for and accepted the plaintiff contractor's tender on a construction project - The contractor's tender contained a clause allowing price increases to be passed on to the general contractor - The work contract contained a price escalation clause for changes agreed upon by the parties - Prior to work commencement the contractor sent a letter to the general contractor attempting to increase the contract price - The general contractor believed the letter was a repudiation so replied by cancelling the contract - The contractor brought an action against the general contractor for improper cancellation of the contract - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the action and held that the contractor's letter was not a repudiation, but rather a unilateral attempt to change the contract - The Queen's Bench further held that the general contractor's letter was a repudiation for which the contractor could recover damages - See paragraph 15.

Contracts - Topic 3666

Performance or breach - Repudiation - Acceptance of repudiation - What constitutes - A contractor attempted to unilaterally increase the price of a contract with a general contractor - The general contractor cancelled the contract - The contractor made one unsuccessful attempt to obtain a reason for cancellation and then commenced an action for damages for breach of contract by the general contractor - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the action and held that the general contractor's repudiation was so absolute that a notice of acceptance by the contractor was not necessary - The Queen's Bench further held that the contractor's passive reaction to the repudiation was not a bar to the contractor's right to recover for breach of contract - See paragraph 15.

Contracts - Topic 4023

Remedies for breach - Damages - Extent of liability - Losses attributable to breach - A contractor's tender for a construction project was accepted - Because of the size of the project, the contractor hired extra personnel and arranged to be without other projects for the four months necessary to complete the contract - The general contractor repudiated the contract before the contractor commenced work - The contractor was unable to obtain other projects during the four month period - The contractor brought an action to recover gross profits being 15% of the contract price and including overhead and net profit usually earned on such a project - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the action and held that the contractor could recover gross profits lost because of the general contractor's repudiation - See paragraphs 10 to 16.

Cases Noticed:

Dawson v. Helicopter Exploration Co. Ltd., [1955] 5 D.L.R. 404, refd to. [para. 15].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Chitty on Contracts (24th Ed.), paragraphs 1479, 1480 [para. 13].

Counsel:

G.F. Graham, for the plaintiff;

R.D. Ghitter, Q.C., for the defendant.

This case was heard by WAITE, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench.

On November, 29, 1979, WAITE, J., delivered the following judgment.