construction - insurance law  - image from pixabay

March 2020

Long fight ends in judgement to Plaintiff includes interest plus costs

Featured Case Study: Infinity Construction Inc. v. Skyline Executive Acquisitions Inc. et al.

Van Krkachovski
Van Krkachovski,
Partner

Stephen Barbier
Stephen Barbier,
Partner

Anisha Bhardwaj
Anisha Bhardwaj,
Law Student

By Van Krkachovski, and Anisha Bhardwaj

In Infinity Construction Inc. v. Skyline Executive Acquisitions Inc. et al., argued by Stephen Barbier of McCague Borlack LLP, judgement was granted for the full amount in favour of, MB client, Infinity.

The defendants, Skyline Executive Acquisitions and Skyline Deerhurst Resort Inc. (“Skyline”), contracted with the plaintiff, Infinity Construction Inc. (“Infinity”), to construct 10 cottages. For 7 of the cottages and miscellaneous work, unpaid invoices to Infinity totaled $1,188,853.81. The defendant agreed that $743,893.72, was owed to Infinity. Therefore, the amount in dispute was $444,960.09.

The issues at trial pertained to the amount owed by Skyline to Infinity, the applicable interest rate, and the interest accrual date.

In making its finding, the Court noted:

  1. Infinity only carried out additional work that Skyline approved, and thus, discharged its evidentiary burden of proving that it reasonably incurred these costs;
  2. The invoices were provided by Infinity in a timely manner and any delays were due to Skyline's own financial issues;
  3. Skyline had information that the base estimate amount would be exceeded, including that various commodities were in the process of cost increases;
  4. Skyline's payment on the costs of the first 5 cottages that went over each budget was an acknowledgement that it accepted Infinity's invoiced amounts to be reasonable. There was no evidence of Skyline working with Infinity to attempt to save costs on the later construction;
  5. Albeit different, Skyline's and Infinity's invoices were compatible as they were broken down in accordance with the contract;

The applicable interest rate was held to be 5% above prime primarily because Skyline had known that it owed Infinity a large sum of money for years and failed to provide a persuasive explanation for its failure to pay. The interest accrual date was held to begin on May 29, 2016.

The Court granted judgement in the amount of $1,188,853.81 and costs in the amount of $175,000, in favour of Infinity.

Read case decisions 1 and 2 and other case summaries for March.

  1. Can a claim be denied due to criminal history from 20 years ago?
  2. Can a pseudonym screen name protect you from a lawsuit?

 


mccague borlack llp

TORONTO | OTTAWA | KITCHENER | BARRIE | LONDON

Copyright McCague Borlack LLP - Legal Notice | mccagueborlack.com | Follow us on Twitter twitter

McCague Borlack LLP is a member of the Canadian Litigation Counsel, a nationwide affiliation of independent law firms. Through CLC's association with The Harmonie Group, our clients have access to legal excellence throughout North America, the U.K. and Europe.

clcnow.com | harmonie.org