ERA

Download the full-sized PDF of Assessing Exclusion Clauses: The Supreme Court of Canada’s Three Issue Framework in Tercon Contractors Ltd v British Columbia(Transportation and Highways)Download the full-sized PDF

Analytics

Share

Permanent link (DOI): https://doi.org/10.7939/R3NZ81147

Download

Export to: EndNote  |  Zotero  |  Mendeley

Communities

This file is in the following communities:

Law, Faculty of

Collections

This file is in the following collections:

Journal Articles (Law)

Assessing Exclusion Clauses: The Supreme Court of Canada’s Three Issue Framework in Tercon Contractors Ltd v British Columbia(Transportation and Highways) Open Access

Descriptions

Author or creator
O'Byrne , Shannon
Additional contributors
Subject/Keyword
enforceability
transportation
transparency
interpretation
contract law
Type of item
Journal Article (Published)
Language
english
Place
Time
Description
Introduction The Supreme Court of Canada's 2010 decision in Tercon Contractors Ltd v British Columbia (Transportation and Highways ) concerned the enforceability of a broadly drafted exclusion clause in the context of public procurement tendering. It is noteworthy for several reasons. First, the decision unanimously articulated a three-issue framework for determining the enforceability of exclusion clauses. Second, and on a more theoretical front, Tercon offered competing visions as to how contracts are to be interpreted. Though the Supreme Court was unanimous that parties to a contract should--of course--generally be bound by its terms, the majority and dissent followed significantly different paths for determining the scope of the agreement at bar. Justices LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Charron, and Cromwell (in a majority decision delivered by Cromwell J.) approached the task of contractual interpretation by elevating the long-standing and judicially enforced values that specifically inform the tendering process including notions of integrity, transparency, and business efficacy. The dissent, per McLachlin C.J., Binnie, Abella, and Rothstein JJ., in a judgment delivered by Binnie J., emphasized another set of long-standing and judicially enforced values, namely freedom of contract and fidelity to the legal principle that contracts are to be enforced according to their words. And third, the Supreme Court of Canada laid to rest the doctrine of fundamental breach as it applies to exclusion clauses--or attempted to at least. In order to explore these themes, this comment provides a brief account of the facts of Tercon and the ...
Date created
2012
DOI
doi:10.7939/R3NZ81147
License information
Rights
© 2012 Shannon O'Byrne. This version of this article is open access and can be downloaded and shared. The original author(s) and source must be cited.
Citation for previous publication
O'Byrne , S., (2012). Assessing Exclusion Clauses: The Supreme Court of Canada’s Three Issue Framework in Tercon Contractors Ltd v British Columbia(Transportation and Highways). Dalhousie Law Journal, 35(1), 215-236.
Source
Link to related item

File Details

Date Uploaded
Date Modified
Audit Status
Audits have not yet been run on this file.
Characterization
File format: pdf (Portable Document Format)
Mime type: application/pdf
File size: 1144265
Last modified: 2016:11:08 17:08:22-07:00
Filename: DLJ_35_1_2012_215.pdf
Original checksum: bf2eaa9e41bf4225ae1e872f66471af9
Well formed: false
Valid: false
Status message: Invalid page dictionary object offset=1549
Activity of users you follow
User Activity Date