AMCI Export Corporation v. Nova Scotia Power Inc.

AMCI Export Corporation v. Nova Scotia Power Inc.

The judge erred in granting summary judgment for Q2 because there was no conclusive admissible evidence that NSPI gave the written notice required by the contract, creating a genuine issue for trial; conversely the judge erred in refusing summary judgment for Q3 and Q4 because the undisputed contract terms and discovery evidence showed AMCI had the ability to source or deliver via other ports and made no adequate efforts to do so, so force majeure did not apply and summary judgment for NSPI on 200,000 tonnes for Q3 and Q4 was warranted.

Citation
2008 NSCA 2
Parties
Appellant/cross Respondent: AMCI Export Corporation; Respondent/cross Appellant: Nova Scotia Power Incorporated
Court
Nova Scotia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 January 2008
Procedural Posture
Contract Dispute Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Cross Appeal; Review of Summary Judgment Order
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted and AMCI's appeal allowed in part (Q2 summary judgment set aside and genuine issue remitted for trial); leave to cross‑appeal granted and NSPI's cross‑appeal allowed in part (summary judgment granted to NSPI for liability for Q3 and Q4 totaling 200,000 tonnes).
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Force Majeure, Estoppel, Contract Interpretation, Options to Purchase
Source Language
English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Commercial Law Summary Judgment Force Majeure Estoppel Contract Interpretation Options to Purchase

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AMCI Export Corporation

Appellant/cross Respondent

Nova Scotia Power Incorporated

Respondent/cross Appellant

Procedural Posture

Contract Dispute Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Cross Appeal; Review of Summary Judgment Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether NSPI validly exercised its Q2 option by written notice as required by the Agreement
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment was proper for Q2 liability
  3. 3 Whether AMCI could invoke force majeure to avoid performance in Q3 and Q4

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in granting summary judgment for Q2 because there was no conclusive admissible evidence that NSPI gave the written notice required by the contract, creating a genuine issue for trial; conversely the judge erred in refusing summary judgment for Q3 and Q4 because the undisputed contract terms and discovery evidence showed AMCI had the ability to source or deliver via other ports and made no adequate efforts to do so, so force majeure did not apply and summary judgment for NSPI on 200,000 tonnes for Q3 and Q4 was warranted.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted and AMCI's appeal allowed in part (Q2 summary judgment set aside and genuine issue remitted for trial); leave to cross‑appeal granted and NSPI's cross‑appeal allowed in part (summary judgment granted to NSPI for liability for Q3 and Q4 totaling 200,000 tonnes).

Orders

  • Grant leave to AMCI to appeal and set aside summary judgment against AMCI for Q2; remit Q2 issue for trial as genuine issue of material fact exists
  • Grant leave to NSPI to cross‑appeal and allow cross‑appeal; grant summary judgment to NSPI for liability for 200,000 tonnes for Q3 and Q4 (July 1 to December 31, 2004)