Brunswick Construction Ltée v. Nowlan

Brunswick Construction Ltée v. Nowlan

Majority: Because the contractor executed the work without supervision and accepted responsibility, it ought to have recognized the obvious defects in the architect’s plans (notably lack of ventilation) and warn or remedy; accordingly the contractor breached its contractual duty and is liable for the failure of the work, and the Appeal Division’s award for damages is affirmed. Dissent: the contract did not impose a duty to detect design faults and damages from distinct contractual breaches should be apportioned and assessed against the contractor only for its workmanship.

Citation
[1975] 2 SCR 523
Parties
Appellant: Brunswick Construction Limitée; Respondent: Bernard E. Nowlan; Respondent: Louise D. Nowlan
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 April 1974
Procedural Posture
Contract Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of New Brunswick, Appeal Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Appeal Division of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick affirmed (majority).
Legal Topics
Building Contract, Breach of Contract, Contractor Duty to Warn, Architectural Design Defect, Concurrent Liability, Implied Warranty of Fitness, Limitation of Actions
Source Language
English
Contract Construction Law Professional Negligence Tort Building Contract Breach of Contract Contractor Duty to Warn Architectural Design Defect +3 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brunswick Construction Limitée

Appellant

Bernard E. Nowlan

Respondent

Louise D. Nowlan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contract Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Supreme Court of New Brunswick, Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contractor is under a contractual or tortious duty to detect and warn owners of defects in plans prepared by the owner’s architect
  2. 2 Whether a contractor who follows defective plans can be liable for resulting damage
  3. 3 Whether liability is joint and several where contractor workmanship and architect design concurrently contribute to damage

Ratio Decidendi

Majority: Because the contractor executed the work without supervision and accepted responsibility, it ought to have recognized the obvious defects in the architect’s plans (notably lack of ventilation) and warn or remedy; accordingly the contractor breached its contractual duty and is liable for the failure of the work, and the Appeal Division’s award for damages is affirmed. Dissent: the contract did not impose a duty to detect design faults and damages from distinct contractual breaches should be apportioned and assessed against the contractor only for its workmanship.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Appeal Division of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick affirmed (majority).

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment of the Appeal Division of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick affirmed