Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 FEBRUARY 2024

Adjudication: Efficient, Informal, And Most Of All, Fair

WeirFoulds LLP
Explore more from WeirFoulds LLP

The Divisional Court recently provided guidance to parties and adjudicators with respect to how an adjudication under the Construction Act[1] should be conducted.

CanadaReal Estate and Construction
Dylan Dilks
Dylan Dilks
Author LinkedIn connections

The Divisional Court recently provided guidance to parties and adjudicators with respect to how an adjudication under the Construction Act1 should be conducted.

Adjudications are generally subject to the procedures set out in Part II.1 of the Construction Act, which may include procedures provided for in the contract or subcontract between the parties.2

An adjudicator has a range of broadly defined powers3 and may conduct the adjudication as he or she determines appropriate in the circumstances.4

In Ledore Investments and Dixin Construction5, Ledore, a subcontractor, carrying on business as Ross Steel, submitted three invoices to Dixin, the general contractor. Dixin, in turn, did not pay those invoices, despite receiving payment from the owner. Dixin did not deliver a notice of non-payment with respect to any of the three invoices.

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.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Ontario’s Mandatory Annual Holdback Release Starts In 2027: What Owners And Contractors Need To Know

Starting in 2027, all Ontario project owners with contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2026, and most owners with contracts dating back to July 1, 2018, must start releasing statutory holdback to their contractors on an annual basis. This requirement is the latest in a series of construction payment reforms under Ontario’s Construction Act. It replaces the traditional model of retaining holdback until substantial performance. Owners and contractors who fail to comply with the notice and payment timelines face exposure to interest claims, payment disputes, and adjudication proceedings.
CanadaReal Estate and Construction
Miller Thomson
Miller Thomson
Article

The Coldcard Exploit: Why Victims May Have Two Routes To Recovery

A five-year-old firmware defect in Coldcard hardware wallets has enabled attackers to systematically drain an estimated $116 million in Bitcoin from over 5,200 victims since July 2026. This unprecedented exploit raises critical questions about manufacturer liability and creates two distinct legal pathways for recovery: blockchain tracing against the perpetrators and potential litigation against Canadian manufacturer Coinkite for product defects that undermined the fundamental security promise of devices mar
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
WeirFoulds LLP
WeirFoulds LLP
Article

Here’s The Drill: Introducing The New CCDC 32 – 2026 Progressive Design-Build Contract

CCDC 32 introduces a progressive design-build framework that allows owners and design-builders to collaboratively develop project scope, budget, and schedule before committing to a final price. Through a two-phase structure with project gates and off-ramp provisions, this standardized contract addresses complex construction projects where requirements cannot be fully defined at the outset. How does this collaborative approach balance flexibility with cost certainty while reshaping traditional roles in const
CanadaReal Estate and Construction
WeirFoulds LLP
WeirFoulds LLP
Article

Who Pays After The Hack? Emerging Paths For Cyber Recovery

Recent court decisions reveal a developing area of cyber insurance subrogation where insurers can potentially recover losses from vendors, financial institutions, and service providers who failed to meet specific cybersecurity obligations. These cases demonstrate that a cybercriminal's involvement does not automatically shield third parties from liability when they breach contractual duties or ignore red flags that contributed to the loss.
United StatesInsurance
WeirFoulds LLP
WeirFoulds LLP