Construction Law Across the Provinces: Key Legislative Moves, Cases, and Practice

Implications

Canada’s construction law landscape continues to evolve at a brisk pace, with significant legislative reform, new adjudication and prompt payment regimes, and appellate guidance shaping day-to-day project delivery and dispute resolution. This article canvasses notable developments across Canada and offers practical takeaways for both lawyers and industry professionals.

This article provides a summary of, and take aways from, the CBA Construction & Infrastructure 2025 Conference as well as the 2025 OBA: A Year in Review.

British Columbia: Prompt Payment Arrives; Lien Reform Tightens the Regime

British Columbia is poised to align with other western and central provinces through the Construction Prompt Payment Act (Bill 20-2025), which introduces statutory prompt payment and adjudication, and complements, rather than replaces, the Builders Lien Act. Once proclaimed, parties should expect Ontario-style payment timelines and fast-track adjudications to manage interim disputes. In parallel, targeted Builders Lien Act amendments reduce the basic holdback release period from 55 to 46 days, abolish Shimco liens,[1] and expand “improvement” to include demolition and removal. These changes will compress cash-flow cycles, require updated contract administration procedures for proper invoices and notices, and refocus lien strategy around a shorter release window.

Against this statutory backdrop, BC is rife with large transport and social infrastructure projects, such as BC’s project pipeline, major health-care redevelopments, the Fraser River Tunnel, Highway 1 Fraser Valley upgrades, and the Broadway Subway extension. Large-scale water and wastewater treatment upgrades are underway, while LNG projects, NEBC connector pipelines, Enbridge’s Aspen Point Program, and emerging wind energy builds highlight the province’s diversified energy agenda. Sophisticated contract forms, early readiness for adjudication, and refined holdback practices will be essential for delivery teams and owners navigating this volume.

Alberta: Public Works Joins Adjudication; Limitations and Risk Allocation Clarified

Alberta has extended adjudication to provincial public works, incorporating the Prompt Payment and Construction Lien Act’s framework under the Public Works Act and using the same nominating authority. The regime requires proper invoices every 31 days through each tier of the contract chain and disallows “pay when paid” arrangements, but limits adjudication to claims at or below $200,000 and maintains the no-lien/no-holdback status quo for these projects. Notably, the ability to issue non-payment notices to stop payments does not apply, which will sharpen focus on timely defenses and payment workflows. Adjudicator orders are directly enforceable in court, and adjudication can proceed alongside litigation or arbitration unless a court orders otherwise.

Two recent decisions offer concrete guidance to practitioners in Alberta:

• In Living Waters v UFA, 2025 ABKB 319, the Court emphasized that the 10‑year ultimate limitation generally runs from the discrete, first actionable breach causing loss, rejecting a “continuing course of conduct” theory absent evidence of subsequent, independent breaches. Counsel should identify early, singular points of failure and calibrate limitation strategy accordingly.
  
• In Brandt Industries v EVRAZ, 2025 ABKB 542, the Court permitted termination for cause but denied completion-cost damages where the agreements were not fixed-price. Brandt recovered a reasonable amount for time-and-materials work performed. This case underscores that precise risk allocation,especially price structure and termination remedies,will drive damages exposure even when termination is valid.

Saskatchewan: Tariff Realignment, Major Capital, and Clarifying Lien and Cost-Plus Principles

Saskatchewan’s 2025 budget invests $4.6 billion across health, education, and power transmission, complemented by a first-ever energy security plan centered on nuclear generation and emissions reduction. The province also stood down certain retaliatory trade measures in mid‑2025, seeking to stabilize procurement and supply chains in the wake of tariff volatility.

On the legal front, JV&M Civil Constructors v Farnham, 2025 SKCA 72 narrows exposure for exaggerated liens; section 53 damages claims for exaggerated liens lie against the lien claimant alone, reinforcing the personal accountability of lien registrants.

In Ace Burger v G & I Construction, 2025 SKCA 82, the Court refined the contractor’s burden under open-ended cost‑plus arrangements. Where no estimate is requested or provided, an implied term prohibits charging for wasteful or uneconomical effort but does not impose a strict “reasonableness” proof standard for every cost item. Owners should document expectations and estimates; contractors should preserve contemporaneous records and avoid inefficiency signals that could invite disallowance.

Manitoba: Appellate Guidance on Lien Discharge and Change Authority; Prompt Payment in Force

Manitoba’s prompt payment regime came into effect on April 1, 2025, and aligns substantially with Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Alberta: 28 days from proper invoice to prime contractor, followed by seven-day pass‑throughs down the chain, structured notice-of-non‑payment requirements, and 30-day adjudicator determinations that are immediately binding subject to later court or arbitration outcomes. Differences in triggering, scope, extension mechanics, and certain exemptions remain province-specific, making contract templates and playbooks a priority for national builders.

With respect to recent notable caselaw within the province, the Manitoba Court of Appeal has issued two practical decisions:

• In Sterling Parkway Residences v Gypsum Drywall, 2024 MBCA 46, the Court of Appeal held that discharging a lien without posting security under section 55(3) of The Builders’ Liens Act is reserved for the clearest of cases, where material facts are undisputed and no lien right could possibly exist. Where owners have benefited from work and engaged directly with subcontractors, “good faith” defences face a high bar.
  
• In Transcona Roofing v Marrbeck Construction, 2024 MBCA 83, the Court of Appeal recognized that conduct can waive formal change-order signature requirements, even in the face of no-waiver clauses, where owners knowingly accept and benefit from the work; determinations by a consultant under CCDC forms are binding unless promptly challenged. These decisions emphasize disciplined change management and timely dispute notices under the standard forms of contract.

Ontario: Adjudication Enforcement, Review Standards, and CCDC 2025 Contract Overhauls

Ontario continues to set national benchmarks for statutory adjudication. Three recent decisions capture the state of play:

• In Integricon v Stevens, 2025 ONSC 4688, the Court enforced an adjudicator’s determination through garnishment and rejected attempts to sidestep payment absent a stay or judicial review, reaffirming the “pay now, argue later” ethos.
• By contrast, Feldt Electric v Gorbern Mechanical, 2025 ONSC 4150 exposes an enforcement gap: a non‑compliant party escaped significant consequences despite an adjudicator’s award, with the Court signaling jurisdictional concerns at the enforcement stage. Practitioners must plan for parallel lien actions, targeted judicial review where appropriate, and settlement leverage that acknowledges variable enforcement outcomes.
  
• Jamrik v 2688126 Ontario Inc, 2024 ONSC 2854 adds conceptual uncertainty, with the Divisional Court distinguishing physical completion from payment metrics for jurisdictional purposes and articulating a hybrid approach to standard of review. The message is that adjudication tolerates “rough justice,” but jurisdictional edges will attract correctness scrutiny.

In the transactional sphere, the CCDC’s 2025 suite introduces material changes to construction management and IPD forms:

• CCDC 5A/5B/17 add “Ready‑for‑Takeover” as a milestone distinct from Substantial Performance, enable early occupancy with trade consent, impose limits on uninsured-loss liability, and delineate construction manager and consultant roles in trade contractor coordination. The forms also acknowledge prompt payment obligations and formalize termination-for-convenience rights, including break‑fee constructs in preconstruction.
  
• CCDC 30 expands collaboration tools, clarifies the Validation Phase, and tightens termination mechanics. Owners and contractors should revisit supplementary conditions, especially around milestone definitions, notice machinery, liability caps, and payment mechanics to harmonize with local lien and prompt payment statutes.

Ontario’s 2025 tariff volatility also rippled through procurement and project finance. Rapid, shifting tariffs on steel, aluminum, select vehicles, and broad non‑CUSMA goods increased costs and disrupted schedules. While many standard forms allocate tax risk, relief is uneven, and time relief may not follow cost relief. The experience reinforces the value of explicit tariff clauses, allowances, early procurement and storage where feasible, and clear change‑in‑law pathways tailored to cross‑border inputs.

Québec: Modernizing the Industry, Diversifying Procurement, and Early Case Trends

Québec’s legislative agenda is active on multiple fronts:

• Bill 51 modernizes the construction industry, with a focus on quality and safety enhancements alongside collective bargaining reform.
  
• Public procurement is diversifying through Bill 62, which equips provincial bodies with more agile acquisition strategies and legitimizes collaborative delivery models; municipal contracting is restructuring under a new statute not yet fully in force.
  
• A new agency, Mobilité Infra Québec, has been created to lead complex transportation initiatives, and the Société québécoise des infrastructures has published guidance on Progressive Design-Build and IPD. Major projects—from Montréal’s Metro Blue Line extension to the Port of Montréal expansion, the Gatineau-Ottawa tram, bridge programs, and Hydro‑Québec’s growth plan—are advancing under a wider array of delivery models.
  
• A provincial prompt payment and dispute-resolution regulation adopted in July 2025 will further reshape public project cash flow and interim dispute management. Early Superior Court decisions in 2024-2025, now on appeal in part, will help define the contours of contractual risk allocation and interim remedies under these modernized frameworks.

Nova Scotia: Prompt Payment Enabled, Regulations Pending; Contract Performance Cases

Nova Scotia has amended its Builders’ Lien Act to incorporate prompt payment (2019) and establish an adjudication authority (2022), with implementing regulations pending.

Two recent Supreme Court decisions underscore the primacy of contract performance:

• In Brooks v FH Development Group, 2025 NSSC 174, a contractor’s attempt to reprice due to pandemic-era supply shocks failed; frustration did not apply, and the contractor’s breach led to damages measured by the increased cost of a comparable home.
  
• In Caldwell v Jones Co Contracting, 2025 NSSC 299, a contractor who performed significant unnotified extra excavation work was required to reimburse the owner; quantum meruit could not rescue a breach of agreed notice and approval pathways. Together, these cases reaffirm the importance of price‑change protocols, written change management, and clear allocation of supply‑chain risk in Atlantic housing and small‑project markets.

Newfoundland and Labrador: Procurement Alignment, Lien Reform Consultations, and Churchill Falls Momentum

Newfoundland and Labrador has updated its Public Procurement Act to apply expressly to the amalgamated NL Hydro and its subsidiaries (subject to specific exceptions) and raised Open Call thresholds. The province’s 2024 consultation on lien reform indicates strong support for extending the 30‑day registration window, adding a 90‑day perfection period, and adopting prompt payment and expedited dispute mechanisms. Meanwhile, NL Hydro and Hydro‑Québec signed a late‑2024 memorandum of understanding to replace the 1969 Churchill Falls contract, with new builds at Gull Island and Churchill Falls, capacity upgrades, and market-based pricing—subject to political and execution risk and targeted for definitive agreements by April 2026.

On lien technicalities, Sam Design v Environmental Applications Group, 2024 NLSC 174 shows that strict compliance with perfection deadlines remains the rule; however, the Court accepted the use of a curative provision to adjust the “last supply” date stated on the lien, thereby saving perfection timing. Lien claimants should draft with precision, and owners should still scrutinize perfection strictly.

Northwest Territories: Builder’s Lien Act in Force

In the Northwest Territories, the Builder’s Lien Act received Royal Assent on October 6, 2023, and came into force on September 1, 2025. Replacing the Mechanics Lien Act, it contains prompt payment provisions intended to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are paid in a timely manner. However, unlike some of the other provinces’ legislation, it does not mandate or provide for adjudication in the event of disputes over payment. This new Act will apply to new contracts entered on or after September 1, 2025; it does not apply to previously existing contracts.

Practice Takeaways: Harmonize Contracts, Prepare for Adjudication, and Document Relentlessly

The throughline across provinces is convergence around prompt payment and adjudication, paired with local variations that materially affect timing, scope, exemptions, and enforcement. National players should maintain province‑specific schedules and notice protocols in their standard forms, train project teams on proper-invoice content and issuance cadence, and pre‑plan adjudication playbooks that integrate with lien and arbitration strategies.

Court decisions this year re-emphasize that risk allocation in the written contract—price structure, termination remedies, milestones, and change-process discipline—will heavily influence outcomes.

Finally, external shocks such as tariffs can upend fixed-price economics; explicit change‑in‑law and tariff relief, alongside supply‑chain mitigation and early procurement, are now table stakes for major works.