Procan Exploration v. Golder Assoc., (1991) 6 B.C.A.C. 307 (CA)

Judge:Hutcheon, Legg and Wood, JJ.A.
Court:Court of Appeal of British Columbia
Case Date:May 24, 1991
Jurisdiction:British Columbia
Citations:(1991), 6 B.C.A.C. 307 (CA)
 
FREE EXCERPT

Procan Exploration v. Golder Assoc. (1991), 6 B.C.A.C. 307 (CA);

    13 W.A.C. 307

MLB headnote and full text

Procan Exploration Company, Coopers & Lybrand Limited, Trustee in Bankruptcy of the estate of Cadillac Explorations Limited, Procan Exploration Company Limited and No. 182 Dynamic Endeavours Inc. (appellants) v. Golder Associates (Western Canada) Ltd., carrying on business as Golder Associates and the said Golder Associates (respondents)

(CA011269)

Indexed As: Procan Exploration Co. et al. v. Golder Associates (Western Canada) Ltd. et al.

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Hutcheon, Legg and Wood, JJ.A.

September 13, 1991.

Summary:

Procan sued Golder for damages for breach of contract (i.e., breach of a settlement agreement).

The British Columbia Supreme Court dismissed Procan's action. Procan appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.

Contracts - Topic 2068

Terms - Implied terms - Exceptions - Conflict with express terms - The British Columbia Court of Appeal discussed when the court would imply a term in a contract - The court held that in the case at bar, the trial judge erred in implying a term in the contract which negated an express term - See paragraphs 17 to 21.

Contracts - Topic 3523

Breach of contract - What constitutes - In a settlement agreement Golder agreed to do rehabilitative and repair work on a tailings pond and to provide the property owner with a program for the work - The program and the work was to be carried out under the professional seals of Golder and their consultant - Golder provided the property owner with a letter and an outline of the work to be done, but these were not under seal - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that Golder breached the terms of the settlement by not providing the required "program ... under seal" - See paragraphs 11 to 22.

Cases Noticed:

Trollope v. NorthWest Metro, [1973] 1 W.L.R. 601 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 18].

Bower v. J.M. Schneider Inc. (1987), 9 B.C.L.R.(2d) 145, refd to. [para. 18].

Strata Corp. NW 1714 v. Winkler (1988), 20 B.C.L.R.(2d) 16 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Chitty on Contracts (26th Ed.), vol. 1, p. 555 [para. 19].

Counsel:

Henning Wiebach and H. Peter Swanson, for the appellants;

   Glenn A. Urquhart and Gordon Phillips, for the respondents.

This appeal was heard on May 24, 1991, before Hutcheon, Legg and Wood, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The following decision of the court was delivered by Hutcheon, J.A., on September 13, 1991.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP