The Supreme Court of Canada’s oft-quoted reasoning in Ledcor v. Northbridge is a “go-to” analysis when it comes to applying faulty workmanship exclusions in builders’ risk policies. Last week, in 9312374 v. Aviva, 2020 ABCA 166, Alberta’s Court of Appeal reversed a Queen’s Bench decision premised on the notion that Ledcor’s faulty workmanship/resulting damage analysis is limited to course-of-construction policies. In doing so, the Court of Appeal very clearly illustrated how the SCC’s reasonable expectations doctrine applies more generally to “all-risks” policies of all types.
Had the parties’ intended a different outcome, they ought to have employed a different exclusionary wording to reflect their objective intent. Ultimately, insurers should welcome the decision in 931, which supports certainty and a uniformity of analysis across different commercial contexts.
Click the PDF below to read more.
/Passle/593009bf3d94760454b5e183/SearchServiceImages/2025-07-04-19-54-57-855-686831918714336e9f5574a9.jpg)
/Passle/593009bf3d94760454b5e183/SearchServiceImages/2025-12-12-18-51-33-608-693c6435f367c9b87b3c7bb8.jpg)
/Passle/593009bf3d94760454b5e183/SearchServiceImages/2025-12-09-15-57-40-245-693846f42b43241fe162dc2b.jpg)
/Passle/593009bf3d94760454b5e183/MediaLibrary/Images/2025-12-05-18-27-58-553-6933242ec95179a7733e720d.jpg)