North Pacific Roadbuilders Ltd. et al. v. AECOM Canada Ltd., 2013 SKQB 148

• Judge: Laing, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: April 19, 2013
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2013 SKQB 148;(2013), 419 Sask.R. 117 (QB)

North Pacific Roadbuilders v. AECOM (2013), 419 Sask.R. 117 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2013] Sask.R. TBEd. MY.046

North Pacific Roadbuilders Ltd. and North Pacific Roadbuilders Ltd./Mudjatik Joint Venture (plaintiffs) v. AECOM Canada Ltd. (formerly UMA Engineering Ltd.) (defendant)

(2002 Q.B.G. No. 1798; 2013 SKQB 148)

Indexed As: North Pacific Roadbuilders Ltd. et al. v. AECOM Canada Ltd.

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Laing, J.

April 19, 2013.

Summary:

The plaintiff, North Pacific Roadbuilders Ltd., sued AECOM Canada Ltd. (formerly UMA Engineering Ltd.) respecting financial losses on a road construction project done for Cameco Corp. UMA had been retained by Cameco as a consultant. The plaintiff claimed that UMA in preparing the specifications and technical information in the tender documents negligently misrepresented the soil and terrain conditions which would be encountered on the project.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the action and calculated damages accordingly.

Editor's Note: Cameco Corp. was also a named defendant in this action with respect to claims for extras other than the soil conditions encountered by the plaintiff. The plaintiff and Cameco entered into a Pierrenger agreement in which the plaintiff agreed to pursue the defendant for its several liabilities only, and agreed to indemnify Cameco against any future contributions sought by the remaining defendant.

Building Contracts - Topic 5445

Architects and engineers - Liability to contractor - Preparing tender documents - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 and Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2829 ].

Building Contracts - Topic 5449

Architects and engineers - Liability to contractor - Misrepresentation - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 and Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2829 ].

Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508

Misrepresentation - General principles - Negligent misrepresentation - The plaintiff sued the defendant engineering firm, claiming that in preparing the technical information in tender documents, the defendant negligently misrepresented the soil and terrain conditions respecting a road construction project - In particular, terrain mapping information relied on extensively by the defendant was not disclosed to the bidders - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the action - The defendant's knowledge that bidders would reasonably rely on the information in the tender documents was sufficient to establish a "special relationship" and to impose a duty of care on the defendant to provide accurate information that was not misleading - By failing to disclose terrain mapping information, the defendant breached its duty of care to bidders - That failure resulted in misrepresentations in the tender documents - Reliance on the tender documents by the plaintiff was reasonable - That reliance resulted in increased expenses - The defendant was liable for damages.

Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2516

Misrepresentation - General principles - Contracts - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 ].

Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2533

Misrepresentation - Elements - Special relationships - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 ].

Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2535

Misrepresentation - Elements - Reliance - [See Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2508 ].

Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 2829

Misrepresentation - Defences - Contributory negligence - The plaintiff sued the defendant engineering firm, claiming that in preparing the specifications and technical information in tender documents, the defendant negligently misrepresented the soil and terrain conditions which would be encountered on a road construction project - In particular, the defendant failed to disclose terrain mapping information that it relied on extensively by the plaintiff - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the action - The court held that the defendant negligently represented the terrain conditions in the tender documents - The court held that there was no negligence on the part of the plaintiff in failing to make inquiries as to whether there was additional terrain information available - See paragraphs 142 to 145.

Cases Noticed:

Queen (D.J.) v. Cognos Inc., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 87; 147 N.R. 169; 60 O.A.C. 1; 99 D.L.R.(4th) 626, refd to. [para. 107].

Edgeworth Construction Ltd. v. Lea (N.D.) & Associates Ltd. et al., [1993] 3 S.C.R. 206; 157 N.R. 241; 32 B.C.A.C. 221; 53 W.A.C. 221; 17 C.C.L.T.(2d) 101; 107 D.L.R.(4th) 169, dist. [para. 108].

Brown & Huston Ltd. v. York (Borough) (1985), 17 C.L.R. 192 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 110].

Opron Construction Co. v. Alberta (1994), 151 A.R. 241; 14 C.L.R.(2d) 97 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 110].

Banque de Montréal et autre v. Hydro-Québec et autres, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 554; 138 N.R. 185; 48 Q.A.C. 241; 93 D.L.R.(4th) 490, refd to. [para. 110].

Spinks v. Canada, [1996] 2 F.C. 563; 195 N.R. 184; 134 D.L.R.(4th) 223 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 114].

Deraps v. Coia et al. (1999), 124 O.A.C. 73; 179 D.L.R.(4th) 168 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 114].

Deraps v. Labourers' Pension Fund of Central and Eastern Canada - see Deraps v. Coia et al.

Flegel Construction (1981) Ltd. v. John Smith Indian Band Muskoday Reserve No. 99 et al. (1994), 124 Sask.R. 241; 17 C.L.R.(2d) 27 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 127].

BG Checo International Ltd. v. British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 12; 147 N.R. 81; 20 B.C.A.C. 241; 35 W.A.C. 241; 99 D.L.R.(4th) 577, refd to. [para. 140].

Alvin's Auto Service Ltd. v. Clew Holdings Ltd. et al., [1997] 9 W.W.R. 5; 157 Sask.R. 278 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 143].

Kapeluck v. Yablonski (1997), 152 Sask.R. 231; 140 W.A.C. 231 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 162].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Klar, Lewis, Tort Law (4th Ed. 2008), pp. 237 [para. 109]; 252, 253 [para. 143]; 381 [para. 126]; 669 [para. 136].

Linden, Allen M., and Feldthusen, Bruce, Canadian Tort Law (8th Ed. 2006), p. 468 [para. 143].

McLachlin, Beverley M., Wallace, Wilfred J., and Grant, Arthur M., The Canadian Law of Architecture and Engineering (2nd Ed. 1994), p. 101 [para. 126].

Counsel:

Scott J. Hammel, Q.C., and Paul E. Ryzuk, for the plaintiffs;

Gregory A. Thompson, Q.C., and Sheila E. Caston, for the defendant.

This case was heard before Laing, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, who delivered the following judgment on April 19, 2013.