Deficiencies are a common reason for litigation in construction proceedings. Dissatisfaction due to deficient work can make homeowners act in a zealous manner – namely, firing existing contractors, hiring subsequent contractors to finish or correct remaining work, and litigating against the initial contractor for the cost of correcting such deficiencies. However, the law recognizes that reasonable opportunities must be provided to correct such deficiencies before setoff or claim rights are allowed.
Three years into the Interim Adjudication process under Part II.1 of the Construction Act, it is apparent that what was promised as a quick and dirty approach to dispute resolution is turning into a fly-by-night process that creates more problems than solutions. In this article, the author shares his thoughts on some of these problems.
While litigation in construction lien issues takes place within the formal, court system, parties have the ability to take such disputes outside of their system and into the hands of their community leaders.
In Ontario and other common-law jurisdictions, legal disputes are subject to what is known as an “adversarial” process. Many lawyers take this approach too close to heart. While lawyers may be skeptical of ADR, perhaps we should begin relationships with opposing counsel from a position of trust rather than combat.