DLC Electrical Inc. v. Oxford

DLC Electrical Inc. v. Oxford

The written July 21, 2005 contract (incorporating the May 24 Proposal and General Scope of Work) was construed to mean DLC’s fixed price covered only the minimal standards of the Canadian Electrical Code and basic items discussed pre-contract; work beyond those minimal CEC standards were extras payable to DLC without a contractual requirement for prior written approval; the owners withheld payments due for extras and progress, causing DLC to abandon the site, so the owners breached and DLC was awarded $12,000 for extras (with prejudgment interest from October 20, 2005); on the counterclaim the court found DLC likely caused the leaking conduit and awarded the owners $17,000 in damages.

Citation
2008 NSSC 157
Parties
Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim: D.L.C. Electrical Incorporated; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim: Murray Oxford; Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim: Valerie Oxford
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Construction Contract Dispute / Trial Decision
Outcome
Partial judgment for Plaintiff DLC Electrical: award for extras; partial success for Defendants on counterclaim for property damage; costs reserved with indication of no costs in view of divided success absent a superior formal offer to settle.
Legal Topics
Contract Interpretation, Extras/variations, Abandonment, Quantum Meruit, Remedies and Damages
Source Language
English
Contract Law Construction Law Tort (negligence) Civil Procedure Contract Interpretation Extras/variations Abandonment Quantum Meruit +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D.L.C. Electrical Incorporated

Plaintiff/defendant by Counterclaim

Murray Oxford

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim

Valerie Oxford

Defendant/plaintiff by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Construction Contract Dispute / Trial Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What was included in the written contract and what constituted extras
  2. 2 Whether the contract was varied to time and materials after July 21, 2005
  3. 3 Whether DLC abandoned the contract without cause or the owners breached by withholding payment

Ratio Decidendi

The written July 21, 2005 contract (incorporating the May 24 Proposal and General Scope of Work) was construed to mean DLC’s fixed price covered only the minimal standards of the Canadian Electrical Code and basic items discussed pre-contract; work beyond those minimal CEC standards were extras payable to DLC without a contractual requirement for prior written approval; the owners withheld payments due for extras and progress, causing DLC to abandon the site, so the owners breached and DLC was awarded $12,000 for extras (with prejudgment interest from October 20, 2005); on the counterclaim the court found DLC likely caused the leaking conduit and awarded the owners $17,000 in damages.

Court Disposition

Partial judgment for Plaintiff DLC Electrical: award for extras; partial success for Defendants on counterclaim for property damage; costs reserved with indication of no costs in view of divided success absent a superior formal offer to settle.

Orders

  • Award to D.L.C. Electrical Incorporated of $12,000.00 for extras and changes plus prejudgment interest from October 20, 2005 to date of judgment
  • Award to Murray and Valerie Oxford on counterclaim of $17,000.00 for damage to residence (no interest awarded)