Fares Construction Limited v. Lead Structural Formwork Limited

Fares Construction Limited v. Lead Structural Formwork Limited

The plaintiffs failed to discharge the onus of showing there was no genuine issue of material fact because the cause of the crane collapse was undetermined and plaintiffs produced no admissible expert evidence; a motions judge cannot weigh disputed evidence or draw the necessary inferences on summary judgment, and granting partial liability would risk inconsistent findings across interconnected actions, so the motion for summary judgment on evidence must be dismissed.

Citation
2024 NSSC 52
Parties
Plaintiff: Fares Construction Limited; Plaintiff: W. M. Fares Family Incorporated; Defendant: Lead Structural Formwork Limited; Third Party: W. M. Fares Architects Inc.; Third Party: Grove US LLC; Third Party: Rapicon Inc.; Third Party: Rapicon Tower Crane West Ltd.; Third Party: APA Inc.; Third Party: BMR Structural Engineering Limited; Third Party: Forgeron Engineering Limited; Third Party: Passmore Inspection & Consulting Ltd.; Fourth Party: Cherubini Group Of Companies; Fourth Party: Cherubini Metal Works; Fifth Party: Lead Structural Formwork Limited; Fifth Party: Grove US LLC; Fifth Party: Rapicon Inc.; Fifth Party: Rapicon Tower Crane West Ltd.; Fifth Party: APA Inc.; Fifth Party: BMR Structural Engineering Limited; Fifth Party: Forgeron Engineering Limited; Fifth Party: Passmore Inspection & Consulting Ltd.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Construction Dispute Negligence and Breach of Contract / Motion for Summary Judgment on Evidence (rule 13.04)
Outcome
Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Negligence, Breach of Contract, Causation, Interest of Justice, Case Management, Third Party Proceedings
Source Language
English

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fares Construction Limited

Plaintiff

W. M. Fares Family Incorporated

Plaintiff

Lead Structural Formwork Limited

Defendant

W. M. Fares Architects Inc.

Third Party

Grove US LLC

Third Party

Rapicon Inc.

Third Party

Rapicon Tower Crane West Ltd.

Third Party

APA Inc.

Third Party

BMR Structural Engineering Limited

Third Party

Forgeron Engineering Limited

Third Party

Passmore Inspection & Consulting Ltd.

Third Party

Cherubini Group Of Companies

Fourth Party

Cherubini Metal Works

Fourth Party

Lead Structural Formwork Limited

Fifth Party

Grove US LLC

Fifth Party

Rapicon Inc.

Fifth Party

Rapicon Tower Crane West Ltd.

Fifth Party

APA Inc.

Fifth Party

BMR Structural Engineering Limited

Fifth Party

Forgeron Engineering Limited

Fifth Party

Passmore Inspection & Consulting Ltd.

Fifth Party

Procedural Posture

Construction Dispute Negligence and Breach of Contract / Motion for Summary Judgment on Evidence (rule 13.04)

  1. 1 What is the applicable test for summary judgment under Rule 13.04?
  2. 2 Whether interests of justice preclude partial summary judgment in interconnected multi-party litigation
  3. 3 Whether genuine issues of material fact (why the crane collapsed) require a trial

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs failed to discharge the onus of showing there was no genuine issue of material fact because the cause of the crane collapse was undetermined and plaintiffs produced no admissible expert evidence; a motions judge cannot weigh disputed evidence or draw the necessary inferences on summary judgment, and granting partial liability would risk inconsistent findings across interconnected actions, so the motion for summary judgment on evidence must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed

Orders

  • Motion dismissed
  • If parties are unable to agree on costs, written submissions to be filed on or before February 29, 2024