The King v. Wallberg

The King v. Wallberg

Majority: The Crown had not admitted the engineer's authority and, having accepted unordered works, its voluntary obligation was limited to paying the fair value of the works to the Crown; the Exchequer Court erred in measuring liability by the contractor's costs plus profit, so the registrar's valuation of fair value should stand and the appeal is allowed with costs.

Citation
(1911) 44 SCR 208
Parties
Appellant/defendant (crown): His Majesty The King; Respondent/plaintiff (contractor): Emil Andrew Wallberg
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 April 1911
Procedural Posture
Appeal Concerning Contract/public Works Payment / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Exchequer Court of Canada (reference to Registrar)
Outcome
Appeal allowed (majority) with costs; Exchequer Court judgment awarding cost plus profit reversed; registrar's report on fair value upheld
Legal Topics
Quantum Meruit, Authority of Government Engineer, Acceptance by Crown, Measure of Compensation (fair Value Vs Cost Plus Profit), Construction of Order of Reference
Source Language
English
Contract Public Works Administrative Law Restitution/quantum Meruit Quantum Meruit Authority of Government Engineer Acceptance by Crown Measure of Compensation (fair Value Vs Cost Plus Profit) +1 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 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

His Majesty The King

Appellant/defendant (crown)

Emil Andrew Wallberg

Respondent/plaintiff (contractor)

Procedural Posture

Appeal Concerning Contract/public Works Payment / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Exchequer Court of Canada (reference to Registrar)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown was liable to pay for work done without authority
  2. 2 Whether the engineer had authority to order the works
  3. 3 What measure of compensation applies on a reference where Crown accepts unordered work (fair value to Crown vs contractor's cost plus profit)

Ratio Decidendi

Majority: The Crown had not admitted the engineer's authority and, having accepted unordered works, its voluntary obligation was limited to paying the fair value of the works to the Crown; the Exchequer Court erred in measuring liability by the contractor's costs plus profit, so the registrar's valuation of fair value should stand and the appeal is allowed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed (majority) with costs; Exchequer Court judgment awarding cost plus profit reversed; registrar's report on fair value upheld

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs to the appellant
  • Judgment of the Exchequer Court awarding contractor's actual cost plus profit set aside