2 total
Contractors owe a duty in tort to subsequent purchasers for the cost of repairing dangerous defects.
The appellant condominium corporation, a subsequent purchaser of a building, discovered severe structural defects in the exterior cladding after a large section fell off.
The appellant repaired the building at its own expense and sued the original general contractor in tort for negligence to recover the pure economic loss.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that a contractor owes a duty of care in tort to subsequent purchasers of a building to take reasonable care in construction and to ensure the building does not contain defects that pose a foreseeable and substantial danger to health and safety.
The Court allowed the appeal, ruling that the reasonable cost of repairing dangerous defects is recoverable in tort, and ordered the matter to proceed to trial.
Pre-judgment garnishment of tax rebate funds owed by provincial Crown to Indian bands denied.
The appellants, who negotiated a tax rebate from the Government of Manitoba on behalf of several Indian bands, sought to garnish the settlement funds before judgment to secure their contingency fees.
The respondent bands argued the funds were protected from attachment under sections 89(1) and 90(1)(b) of the Indian Act.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the funds could not be garnished.
While the Court split on whether 'Her Majesty' in section 90(1)(b) includes the provincial Crown, the majority concluded that either the funds were protected by the Indian Act or the provincial Garnishment Act did not apply to the Crown in these circumstances.
