United Grain Growers Ltd. v. Agri-Builders (Regina) Ltd., (1984) 33 Sask.R. 241 (CA)

• Judge: Brownridge, Tallis, and Vancise, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: June 11, 1984
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1984), 33 Sask.R. 241 (CA)

United Grain v. Agri-Builders Ltd. (1984), 33 Sask.R. 241 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

United Grain Growers Limited v. Agri-Builders (Regina) Ltd.

(No. 7850)

Indexed As: United Grain Growers Ltd. v. Agri-Builders (Regina) Ltd.

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Brownridge, Tallis, and Vancise, JJ.A.

June 11, 1984.

Summary:

The defendant contracted with the plaintiff to build two grain storage bins. The bins and a nearby storage shed were destroyed in a windstorm. The plaintiff brought an action for damages for breach of contract by the defendant for failing to insure the plaintiff's property during construction as required by the contract. Alternatively, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant failed to construct the bins in a good and workmanlike manner. The defendant sought rectification of the contract on the ground of mutual mistake and counterclaimed for the value of the work done.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported in (1982), 18 Sask.R. 316, allowed the plaintiff's action and dismissed the counterclaim. The defendant appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Building Contracts - Topic 3616

Liability of builder - Defences - Contributory negligence by owner - Knowledge - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal affirmed that a contractor was negligent in proceeding with construction when he knew that the owner was negligent in failing to complete the preliminary work according to the plans - The owner suffered damage when the construction was destroyed in a windstorm - The court affirmed that the contractor's negligence and failure to proceed in a good and workmanlike manner was the sole and direct cause of the loss - See paragraphs 13 to 19.

Deeds and Documents - Topic 5057

Rectification - When available - Mutual mistake - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal stated that in the absence of fraud, rectification of a document was available only in the case of mutual mistake - See paragraph 9.

Deeds and Documents - Topic 5057

Rectification - When available - Mutual mistake - A contractor failed to read several conditions printed on the reverse of a building contract - He sought rectification of the contract after one of the conditions was breached, claiming that the parties never intended to include the condition - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal affirmed that rectification was impossible, because there was no mutual mistake and no exceptional circumstances which would permit rectification based on unilateral mistake - See paragraphs 9 to 12.

Cases Noticed:

Bercovici v. Palmer (1967), 58 W.W.R.(N.S.) 111 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

J. Nunes Diamonds Ltd. and Dominion Electric Protection Company, [1972] S.C.R. 769, refd to. [para. 15].

Carl M. Halvorson Inc. v. Robert McLellan & Co. Ltd. et al., [1973] S.C.R. 65, refd to. [para. 15].

Schwebel v. Telekes, 61 D.L.R.(2d) 470 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

Bagot v. Stevens Scanlan & Co. Ltd., [1966] 1 Q.B. 197, refd to. [para. 15].

Dominion Chains Co. Ltd. v. Eastern Construction Co. Ltd. (1976), 68 D.L.R.(3d) 385, refd to. [para. 16].

Giffels Associates Ltd. v. Eastern Construction Co. Ltd. (1978), 19 N.R. 298; 84 D.L.R.(3d) 344 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 16].

Pound v. Nakonechy, [1984] 1 W.W.R. 289; 28 Sask.R. 222; 27 C.C.L.T. 146, refd to. [para. 16].

Counsel:

Robert J. Smith, for the appellant;

R. Shawn Smith, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Brownridge, Tallis, and Vancise, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, whose decision was delivered at Regina, Saskatchewan, by Vancise, J.A., on June 11, 1984.