The appellant hired the respondent to demolish two buildings under a fixed-price contract.
During demolition, hidden asbestos was discovered, and the respondent charged for its removal as an 'extra'.
The Small Claims Court trial judge found the appellant had agreed to the extra work and awarded damages based on quantum meruit, discounting the respondent's ballparked figures by 30%.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial judge's factual findings were entitled to deference and his application of quantum meruit was appropriate given the informal mandate of the Small Claims Court.
