Sunnyside Nursing Home v. Builders Contract Management Ltd. et al., (1985) 40 Sask.R. 1 (QB)

• Judge: Walker, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: March 20, 1985
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1985), 40 Sask.R. 1 (QB);1985 CanLII 2311 (SK QB);1985 CanLII 2311 (FCA);[1985] 4 WWR 97;[1985] SJ No 145 (QL);15 CLR 1;32 ACWS (2d) 84;40 Sask R 1

Sunnyside Nursing v. Builders Cont. (1985), 40 Sask.R. 1 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Sunnyside Nursing Home (plaintiff) v. Builders Contract Management Ltd., Sabrice Ltd., Midcanada Consultants Ltd., Illmayer Sivam Consultants Ltd., Si Sivam, General Security Insurance Company of Canada (defendants) and Redi-Mix Limited and Rhodes Vaughn and Company Ltd. (third parties)

(No. 433)

Indexed As: Sunnyside Nursing Home v. Builders Contract Management Ltd. et al.

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Walker, J.

March 20, 1985.

Summary:

Sunnyside hired a general contractor and an architect for the purpose of building a 16 storey apartment building. After four stories were completed defects in design and workmanship were discovered. Work on the building was stopped. Sunnyside sued the general contractor, the architect, an engineer, the engineer's employee and the insurance company which issued a performance bond.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench found that the defects could be repaired and awarded judgment to Sunnyside against the general contractor, the architect, the engineer, the engineer's employee and the surety (see paragraph 437). The court also awarded the general contractor damages (see paragraph 438) and dismissed the third party claims (see paragraph 439).

Evidence - Topic 1500

Hearsay rule - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to a definition of the hearsay rule (see paragraph 16).

Practice - Topic 4496

Discovery - Use of examination in court - Use of discovery evidence of one defendant against another defendant - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench stated that evidence given on an examination for discovery of one defendant cannot, as a general rule, be used at trial as evidence against a co-defendant (see paragraph 17).

Evidence - Topic 2401

Presumptions - Inference from failure to call available evidence - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to the circumstances when an adverse inference can fairly be made from the failure to call available evidence (see paragraph 25).

Evidence - Topic 7075

Opinion evidence - Reports by experts - Offer of report at trial - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench admitted a report of an engineering expert - The court referred to several reasons for admitting the report (see paragraph 30).

Evidence - Topic 7078

Opinion evidence - Reports by experts - Test reports - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench admitted test reports respecting the strength of concrete - The court referred to several reasons for admitting the report (see paragraphs 31, 32 and 33).

Courts - Topic 558

Judges - Power to appoint expert assistance (assessors) - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to the purpose and functions of an assessor appointed to assist a trial judge (see paragraphs 36 to 40).

Evidence - Topic 2702

Inspection or view out of court by judge - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench stated that a view out of court may be used only to assist the judge to better understand and apply the evidence given at trial (see paragraph 43).

Evidence - Topic 7002

Opinion evidence - Expert evidence - Acceptance, rejection and weight to be given to expert opinion - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to the proper considerations in assessing expert opinion (see paragraphs 47 to 51).

Building Contracts - Topic 3428

Liability of builder, for design - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to the duty of a builder to an owner respecting design of a building and flaws in the design (see paragraphs 82 to 84).

Evidence - Topic 6751

Interpretation of legal act - Evidence of surrounding circumstances - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench stated that surrounding circumstances may be referred to in the interpretation of words used in an agreement (see paragraph 105).

Building Contracts - Topic 1304

Tender calls - Effect of tender by builder - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench stated that an invitation to tender is an offer to negotiate and is not an offer capable of acceptance (see paragraph 108).

Building Contracts - Topic 5385

Architects and engineers - Duties - Duty to act judicially - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to circumstances when an architect must act impartially notwithstanding that he was retained by the owner (see paragraphs 148 and 149).

Building Contracts - Topic 927

Repudiation by owner - What constitutes repudiation by owner - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to circumstances and breaches which did not constitute repudiation of the building contract by the owner (see paragraphs 230 to 252).

Building Contracts - Topic 785

The contract - Frustration, what constitutes - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to circumstances which would constitute frustration of a building contract (see paragraph 255).

Building Contracts - Topic 3432

Liability of builder - Defective workmanship, fundamental breach - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to circumstances involving defective workmanship which did not constitute fundamental breach (see paragraphs 261 and 262).

Building Contracts - Topic 2826

Payment to builder - Interest, on overdue accounts - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench rejected a claim for interest on overdue progress payments where the work done by the builder was subject to substantial claims for defects (see paragraph 278).

Building Contracts - Topic 2828

Payment to builder - Interest as damages - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench rejected a claim to interest as damages where the work done by the builder was subject to substantial claims for defects (see paragraphs 281 and 282).

Contracts - Topic 554

Joint and several liability - Circumstances resulting in joint and several liability - An owner of a building sued an architect for design defects and sued a contractor for defective workmanship - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the architect and the contractor were not jointly and severally liable because there were two separate contracts, two separate breaches and two causes of action (see paragraph 292).

Building Contracts - Topic 3575

Liability of builder - Damages - Duty of owner to mitigate - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to circumstances where the owner acted reasonably (in delaying remedial action) when the owner was faced with substantial defective work by the builder (see paragraphs 295 to 305).

Guarantee and Indemnity - Topic 3031

Defences of surety - Changes in the principal contract - Immaterial changes - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench referred to changes in the principal contract which were immaterial and did not release the surety (see paragraphs 403 to 413).

Master and Servant - Topic 4606

Liabilities of servant - To third parties, where employer liable for acts of servant - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench stated that the concept of vicarious liability of an employer for his employees does not protect an employee from liability (see paragraph 422).

Building Contracts - Topic 5502

Engineers - Duty to owner respecting design - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held a structural engineer liable for design defects notwithstanding that the engineer was employed by the owner's architect and not by the owner (see paragraphs 419 to 422).

Cases Noticed:

Subramanium v. Public Prosecutor, [1956] 1 W.L.R. 965, refd to. [para. 16].

Ares v. Venner (1970), 14 D.L.R.(3d) 4 (S.C.C.), refd to. [paras. 16 and 30].

Bank of Toronto v. Matheson, [1927] 2 W.W.R. 10 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

Sygnatowich v. Sygnatowich, [1933] 1 W.W.R. 132 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

Murray v. The City of Saskatoon (1951), 4 W.W.R.(N.S.) 234 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].

Phillips et al. v. Ford Motor Co. of Canada Ltd. et al., [1971] 2 O.R. 637 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

White v. P.M. Products Ltd. and Killam, 23 W.W.R.(N.S.) 699, refd to. [para. 38].

Department of Labour and the University of Regina, Re (1975), 62 D.L.R.(3d) 22, refd to. [para. 42].

Gallant et al. v. F.W. Woolworth Co. Limited et al., [1971] 1 W.W.R. 336, refd to. [para. 49].

Herald v. Vaughn et al., 27 A.R. 440 (Alta. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 49].

Baribeau, Re, 20 M.V.R. 60, refd to. [para. 49].

Nowlan v. Brunswick Construction Ltd. (1974), 8 N.B.R.(2d) 76 (S.C.C.), dist. [para. 82].

Steel Co. of Canada Ltd. v. Willand Management Ltd., 58 D.L.R.(2d) 595 (S.C.C.), refd to. [paras. 82 and 98].

Thorn v. The Mayor and Corporation of the City of London, 45 L.J.Q.B. 487 (H.L.), dist. [para. 82].

Corporation of District of Surrey v. Carrol Hatch and Associates, [1979] 6 W.W.R. 289 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [paras. 84 and 290].

Cammell Laird and Co. v. Manganese and Co., [1934] All E.R. Rep. 1 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 98].

Lafontaine v. Hartford Ins. and Ind. Co., [1960] O.W.N. 25, refd to. [para. 98].

Boyd v. South Winnipeg Ltd., [1917] 2 W.W.R. 489, refd to. [para. 98].

Susan Floor Co. v. Forst's Ltd., [1942] 1 W.W.R. 553 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 98].

Moncton v. Aprile Contracting Ltd., 37 N.B.R.(2d) 215; 97 A.P.R. 215, refd to. [para. 98].

Prenn v. Simmonds, [1971] 1 W.L.R. 1381 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 105].

Cape Breton Development Corporation v. MacNiel, 29 N.S.R.(2d) 122; 45 A.P.R. 122 (N.S.S.C.), refd to. [para. 147].

Desgagne v. Fabrique de St. Phillipe d'Arvida, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 19; 51 N.R. 241, refd to. [para. 231].

Australian Dispatch Line v. Anglo-Canadian Shipping Co., [1940] 4 D.L.R. 104 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 257].

Sussie Atlantique Societe D'Armement Maritime S.A. v. N.V. Rotterdamsche Kolen Central, [1966] 2 All E.R. 61 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 260].

Western Tractor Limited v. Dyck Limited (1969), 70 W.W.R.(N.S.) 215 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 261].

Borg-Warner Acceptance Canada Limited v. Victor Wyonzek, [1981] 4 W.W.R. 193 (Sask. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 261].

Beldessi et al. v. Island Equipment Ltd. (1973), 41 D.L.R.(3d) 147 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 261].

R.G. McLean Ltd. v. Canadian Vickers Ltd., [1971] 1 O.R. 207 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 261].

Gill v. Kittler C.O.B. Central Paving Hanna et al. (1983), 44 A.R. 321; 21 B.L.R. 108 (Alta. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 261].

Prince Albert Pulp Company Ltd. and Parsons and Whittemore Pulp Mills Inc. v. Foundation Company of Canada Ltd., [1976] 4 W.W.R. 586; 8 N.R. 181 (S.C.C.), refd to. [paras. 280 and 370].

Eyben v. K.R. Ranches (1970) Ltd., 38 A.R. 336; 29 C.P.C. 49 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 280].

Thompson v. London County Council, [1899] 1 Q.B. 840 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 290].

Prince Albert v. Underwood McLelland and Asociates Ltd. (1969), 66 W.W.R.(N.S.) 449 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 290].

Groves-Raffin Construction Ltd. v. Bank of Nova Scotia, [1975] 2 W.W.R. 97; 51 D.L.R.(3d) 380, refd to. [para. 290].

Sealand of the Pacific Limited v. McHaffie, 51 D.L.R.(3d) 702 (B.C.C.A), refd to. [para. 290].

Campbell Flour Mills v. Bowes (1914), 32 O.L.R. 270, refd to. [para. 290].

Costello v. Cormier (1980), 28 N.B.R.(2d) 398; 63 A.P.R. 398 (N.B.C.A.), refd to. [para. 296].

Banco de Portugal v. Waterlaw and Sons Ltd., [1932] A.C. 452, refd to. [para. 299].

Radford v. De Froberville, [1978] 1 All E.R. 33, refd to. [para. 299].

Asmera Oil Corp. Ltd. v. Sea Oil and General Corporation et al., [1978] 6 W.W.R. 301; 23 N.R. 181 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 302].

Galatiuk v. Regina (City), [1984] 6 W.W.R. 262; 36 Sask.R. 2, refd to. [para. 305].

Gillian v. Nelson Lumber Company Ltd., 38 A.R. 409, refd to. [para. 309].

Dryden Construction Co. v. H.E.P.C. of Ontario, [1960] S.C.R. 694 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 326].

Peter Kiewit Sons Co. v. Eakins Const. Ltd., [1960] S.C.R. 361, refd to. [para. 326].

Moncton v. Aprile Contracting Ltd. (1980), 29 N.B.R.(2d) 631; 66 A.P.R. 631 (N.B.C.A.), refd to. [para. 326].

Asamera Oil Corp. Ltd. etc., [1978] 6 W.W.R. 301; 23 N.R. 181 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 369].

Gray-Campbell Limited v. Jamieson and Batterby, [1923] 3 W.W.R. 1146, refd to. [para. 402].

Massey-Ferguson Ltd. v. Crittenden and Vanthuyne, 56 W.W.R.(N.S.) 289, refd to. [para. 403].

Royal Bank of Canada v. Girgulis, [1979] 3 W.W.R. 451, refd to. [para. 403].

Niagara and Ontario Construction Co. v. Wyse et al. (1913), 10 D.L.R. 116 (Ont. S.C.), refd to. [para. 404].

Hydro-Electric Power Commission v. Fidelity Insurance Co. et al., [1937] 4 D.L.R. 626 (Ont. S.C.), refd to. [para. 405].

Ferraro v. The National Surety Co., [1917] 1 W.W.R. 719, refd to. [para. 406].

United States v. Walsh (1902), 115 Federal Reporter 697, refd to. [para. 410].

Hayes, Trustee of Preload Co. v. Regina, 20 D.L.R.(2d) 586, refd to. [para. 411].

Hedley Byrne Company Ltd. v. Heller and Partners Ltd., [1963] 2 All E.R. 575 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 419].

McAlister (Donoghue) v. Stevenson, [1932] A.C. 562, refd to. [para. 419].

Haig v. Bamford, [1976] 3 W.W.R. 331; 9 N.R. 43 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 419].

International Racquet Time v. McDonald (1981), 30 A.R. 457, refd to. [para. 422].

Trident Construction Ltd. v. W.L. Wardrop and Associates Ltd., [1979] 6 W.W.R. 481; 1 Man.R.(2d) 268, refd to. [para. 425].

Hanak v. Green, [1958] 2 Q.B. 9, refd to. [para. 435].

United Chemicals Ltd. v. Prince Albert Pulp Company, 11 Sask.R. 320 (Sask. Q.B.), refd to. [para. 436].

Statutes Noticed:

Saskatchewan Evidence Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. S-16, sect. 31 [para. 32]; sect. 48 [para. 44].

Queen's Bench Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. Q-1, sect. 45(18) [para. 402]; sect. 74 [para. 36].

Rules of Court (Sask.), Queen's Bench Rule, rule 281 [para. 41].

National Building Code of Canada, 1977, Part 4 [para. 74].

Contributory Negligence Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. C-31 [para. 225].

Authors and Works Noticed:

McMillan, Lord, Canadian Bar Rev. (1948), 26 C.B.R. 491 [para. 14].

Wigmore on Evidence (Chadbourne Rev. 1979), vol. 2, para. 287 [para. 25].

Goldsmith, Canadian Building Contracts (3rd Ed.), pp. 42 [para. 228]; 60 [para. 96]; 63 [para. 326]; 94 [para. 239]; 111 [para. 83].

Hudson's Building and Engineering Contracts (10th Ed.), 1st Supp., paras. 161 [para. 70]; 274 [para. 99]; 288 [para. 84]; 582 [para. 231 and 299]; 584 [para. 436]; 587 [para. 328]; 591 [para. 296]; 810 [para. 410].

Emden and Gill, Building Contracts and Practice (7th Ed.), p. 84 [para. 108].

Canadian Encyclopedic Digest (Western)(3rd Ed.), vol. 5, para. 115 [para. 148].

McGregor on Damages (13th Ed.), p. 260 [para. 288].

Williams, Glanville, Joint Torts and Contributory Negligence, 1951, p. 2 [para. 290].

Simpson on Suretyship, 1976, p. 101 [para. 407].

Counsel:

J.L. Robertson, Q.C., and R.A.J. Robertson, for the plaintiff;

B.J. Scherman and G. Vogeli, for the defendants, Builders Contract Management Ltd., Sabrice Ltd. and Security Insurance Company of Canada;

M.O. Laprairie, for Midcanada Consultants Ltd. (for part of the trial);

L.T. Priel, for Illmayer Sivam Consultants Ltd. and Si Sivam (for part of the trial);

W.D. Preston and G. Bunt, for Rhodes Vaughn and Company Ltd.;

D. Pelletier, for Redi-Mix Limited.

This case was heard by Walker, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench.

The decision of Walker, J., was delivered on March 20, 1985.