Shaw (Gordon) Concrete Products Ltd. v. Design Collaborative Ltd., (1985) 67 N.S.R.(2d) 299 (TD)

• Judge: Grant, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: January 09, 1985
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1985), 67 N.S.R.(2d) 299 (TD)

Shaw Concrete v. Design Collabor. (1985), 67 N.S.R.(2d) 299 (TD);

    155 A.P.R. 299

MLB headnote and full text

Gordon Shaw Concrete Products Limited v. Design Collaborative Limited

(1983 S.H. No. 45909)

Indexed As: Shaw (Gordon) Concrete Products Ltd. v. Design Collaborative Ltd.

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Trial Division

Grant, J.

January 17, 1985.

Summary:

The defendant architectural firm contracted with the plaintiff concrete manufacturer to design an earth-sheltered home to be sold on the market in the $60,000 range. When the plans and specifications were costed, they exceeded $100,000. The concrete manufacturer brought an action for negligent misrepresentation to recover the fee paid to the architectural firm, damages and interest. The architectural firm counterclaimed for the balance of its fees.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, allowed the concrete manufacturer's action and dismissed the architectural firm's counterclaim.

Building Contracts - Topic 5503

Architects and engineers - Duty to owner - Respecting design of a building where the owner imposes cost limitations - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, held that an architectural firm was negligent when it agreed to design a home costing $60,000.00, but when the specifications were costed the price exceeded $100,000.00 - See paragraphs 1 to 38.

Cases Noticed:

Saxby & Pokorny v. Fowler (1977), 3 A.R. 607; 2 C.C.L.T. 195, refd to. [para. 34].

Pratt v. St. Albert Protestant Separate School District No. 6 (1969), 69 W.W.R.(N.S.) 62, refd to. [para. 36].

Counsel:

Barbara S. Penick, for Gordon Shaw Concrete Products Ltd.;

Robert Murrant, for Design Collaborative Ltd.

This case was heard on January 9, 1985, before Grant, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, who delivered the following decision on January 17, 1985: