Royale Flooring v. Hotel Nova Scotia Ltd.

Royale Flooring v. Hotel Nova Scotia Ltd.

The adjudicator found the quoted price included demolition, the contractor failed to confirm and supply the appropriate (dark/graphite) grout and failed to ensure consistent tile dye lots, rendering the workmanship fundamentally deficient and of no value; accordingly the claimant is not entitled to the contract price and the defendant is entitled to the reasonable cost to obtain the contractual benefit ($30,000) less the contract price ($23,427) = $6,573, plus reimbursement of filing costs $113.20, total $6,686.20.

Citation
2008 NSSM 21
Parties
Claimant; Defendant by Counterclaim: 3107313 Nova Scotia Limited carrying on business as Royale Flooring; Defendant; Claimant by Counterclaim: Hotel Nova Scotia Limited
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Final Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Claimant's claims dismissed; Defendant's counterclaim allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Defective Performance, Counterclaim and Set Off, Mitigation of Damages, Contract Interpretation (scope of Quote), Specification and Approval of Materials/dye Lots
Source Language
English
Contract Law Construction Law Remedies Civil Procedure Breach of Contract Defective Performance Counterclaim and Set Off Mitigation of Damages +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

3107313 Nova Scotia Limited carrying on business as Royale Flooring

Claimant; Defendant by Counterclaim

Hotel Nova Scotia Limited

Defendant; Claimant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Final Decision (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was demolition included in the quoted price?
  2. 2 Was a dark (graphite) grout specified or should contractor have confirmed grout colour?
  3. 3 Did dye lot variations render the work defective?

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator found the quoted price included demolition, the contractor failed to confirm and supply the appropriate (dark/graphite) grout and failed to ensure consistent tile dye lots, rendering the workmanship fundamentally deficient and of no value; accordingly the claimant is not entitled to the contract price and the defendant is entitled to the reasonable cost to obtain the contractual benefit ($30,000) less the contract price ($23,427) = $6,573, plus reimbursement of filing costs $113.20, total $6,686.20.

Court Disposition

Claimant's claims dismissed; Defendant's counterclaim allowed in part.

Orders

  • Claimant's claim for extra demolition costs of $4,446.00 dismissed as included in the original quote.
  • Judgment for the Defendant on its counterclaim for damages in the amount of $6,573.00.