Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 SEPTEMBER 2016

Canadian Contractual Interpretation Just Got More Difficult

Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Contributor
Bennett Jones LLP

Bennett Jones LLP

Bennett Jones is one of Canada’s premier business law firms. With deep experience in complex...

View firm profile
Explore more from Bennett Jones LLP

There is a new exception to the new Canadian approach for reviewing the interpretation of contracts: a trial court's interpretation of a standard form contract may be reviewed on appeal on the standard of correctness...

CanadaCorporate/Commercial Law

By Scott H.D. Bower, Russell J. Kruger and Jonathan McDaniel

There is a new exception to the new Canadian approach for reviewing the interpretation of contracts: a trial court's interpretation of a standard form contract may be reviewed on appeal on the standard of correctness, rather than the usual standard of palpable and overriding error, the Supreme Court of Canada recently held in Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37 [Ledcor]. The Court stated that in most circumstances, the interpretation of a standard form contract will be a question of law, rather than a question of mixed law and fact, thus attracting a less deferential standard.

As discussed in a previous blog, the Supreme Court of Canada in Creston Moly Corp v Sattva Capital Corp, 2014 SCC 53 [Sattva], a ground breaking 2014 decision, held that "contractual interpretation is a question of mixed fact and law subject to deferential review on appeal," unless there is

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from