Canada: A Defining Mistake: The Importance of Accurate Drafting in All Commercial Documents

Last Updated: June 18 2010
Article by Sandeep J. Joshi

Originally published in Commercial Litigation Review - Volume 8, Number 2, May 2010.

In this article, Commercial Litigation Review shifts our focus to a recent decision of the Quebec Superior Court. All counsel must remind themselves constantly of the importance of precise drafting and that precision must extend both to the contract and to pre-contractual documents. Mr. Sandeep Joshi carefully analyses the legal interpretation of the Superior Court's decision (which is under appeal) and concludes with six precise guiding principles which are useful in everyday practice.

In its recent decision in IHAG-Holding AG v. Intrawest Corporation,1 the Quebec Superior Court reaffirmed the importance of proper and careful drafting in all commercial documents, including pre-contractual documents. While the case itself involved somewhat complicated and unusual facts, the underlying principles are of general application and serve as a useful reminder to counsel.


In the case, IHAG claimed that it was entitled, in part, to approximately $6.2 million from Intrawest pursuant to the terms of an earn out provision in the agreement executed between the parties as part of IHAG's sale of a mountain resort property to Intrawest.

At the time of the sale negotiations, the property had incurred significant losses, its EBITDA over the past several years was essentially zero, it required substantial capital expenditure and it had failed to generate any offers from third parties as part of an auction process. To allay IHAG's concern regarding the purchase price, Intrawest proposed an earnout provision, which was referred to as the Resort Operation Payment Amount ("ROPA"). IHAG responded to the ROPA proposal by requesting that it be amended to include an additional year, which Intrawest agreed to. As a result, Intrawest drafted and submitted a non-binding letter of intent, which included the agreed upon ROPA provision. The parties subsequently executed the non-binding letter of intent.

Thereafter, Intrawest instructed its external legal counsel to prepare a draft agreement on the basis of the non-binding letter of intent. Intrawest's counsel circulated three drafts of the agreement for internal review before circulating it to IHAG's counsel. The first two drafts of the agreement contained a series of complex definitions, one of which correctly described how the ROPA payment was to be calculated. However, in an effort to "clean up" the agreement and make it "clearer", Intrawest's external counsel inadvertently revised the ROPA definition. While all of the elements of the provision remained in the revised definition, the order of the words themselves, and their effect, was altered. Instead of defining ROPA as "the amount, if any, equal to 4.8 times the amount by which (a) Net Resort EBITDA during the Resort Operation Payment Calculation Period exceeds (b) $2,000,000" (as it was defined in the letter of intent), ROPA was defined in the agreement as "the amount, if any, equal to the amount by which (a) 4.8 times Net Resort EBITDA during the Resort Operation Payment Calculation Period exceeds (b) $2,000,000."

The defining mistake made by Intrawest's external counsel was to insert the words "the amount by which" before instead of after the figure "4.8 times".2 The change in the ROPA definition was not noticed by Intrawest or its counsel before the document was circulated to IHAG's counsel; nor was it noticed in any of the subsequent six drafts exchanged between the parties before the agreement, which contained an entire agreement clause, was executed.

In the first four years after the sale, Intrawest earned approximately $1.7 million in total net revenues from the property. Nonetheless, IHAG commenced an action claiming that it was entitled to $6.2 million on the basis of the ROPA definition in the agreement. Intrawest argued that the ROPA definition in the agreement contained a drafting error (made by its own counsel) and, therefore, it did not reflect the agreement reached by the parties. Intrawest further argued that the ROPA definition in the executed, non-binding letter of intent should be the basis upon which the ROPA payment, if any, was to be calculated.

The Decision

In determining whether a ROPA payment was due, Justice Mayer first considered whether the entire agreement clause in the agreement precluded the admissibility of certain evidence, such as the history of the negotiations and the letter of intent. Although he recognized that Quebec law traditionally recognizes the validity of entire agreement clauses, Mayer J. concluded that, in the circumstances, the Court would not apply the entire agreement clause for two reasons:

  1. Article 1425 of the Quebec Civil Code imposes an obligation upon the Court to seek out the common intention of the parties when interpreting a contact and provides that "all evidence of any fact relevant to a dispute is admissible and may be presented by any means."3 As a result, Mayer J. concluded that he was required to look at the documentation entered into before the execution of the agreement in order to determine whether there was an error in the drafting of the agreement that defeated or contradicted what the parties intended.4
  2. In the circumstances, IHAG was not acting in good faith when it sought to enforce the ROPA definition in the agreement for its benefit and to the detriment of Intrawest.

After concluding that the entire agreement clause should be set aside and not applied, Mayer J. considered whether there was a drafting error in the ROPA definition in the agreement. He concluded that there was a material drafting error in the ROPA definition in the agreement for two reasons:

  1. The ROPA definition in the agreement was never discussed, commented on or negotiated during the drafting process and, therefore, it had been overlooked by all parties.5
  2. Enforcing the ROPA definition in the agreement would result in an unreasonable commercial transaction because it would result in a selling price for the property that was not reasonably conceivable in the circumstances.6

After concluding that there was a drafting error in the ROPA definition, Mayer J. then considered whether the error was excusable. Although the agreement was drafted by experienced legal counsel and reviewed by other experienced professionals, Mayer J. concluded that the error was excusable because it was "a difficult error to detect in a long and complex series of definitions" and it was "not that easy to discern" the error other than by translating the words into the appropriate mathematical formulas.7

In determining the appropriate remedy, Mayer J. concluded that the most equitable solution in the circumstances was to enforce the common intention of the parties with respect to the ROPA payment and to declare the correct ROPA definition in the agreement to be the ROPA definition set out in the executed nonbinding letter of intent.8 Justice Mayer noted that although the letter of intent was a non-binding agreement in the sense that it did not create legal obligations, it evidenced "a meeting of the minds which [reflected] the business terms agreed to by the parties."9


The decision reached by Mayer J. is, on the facts, an equitable result. Although the case was decided under Quebec's Civil Code, the same decision would likely be reached by a judge applying the common law in a case of mistake, albeit by different means. The decision is therefore a useful reminder of the importance of accurate and careful drafting at each stage of a commercial transaction, including in pre-contractual documents.

The Parol Evidence Rule and Entire Agreement Clauses

In IHAG, Mayer J. relied, in part, on article 1425 of the Quebec Civil Code to sidestep the entire agreement clause and review the history of the negotiations and letter of intent in order to determine whether there was a drafting error that defeated or contradicted the common intention of the parties.

At common law, both the parol evidence rule and entire agreement clauses are often relied upon to prevent the admission into evidence of agreements, negotiations and understandings for the purpose of varying or contradicting the express terms of a written agreement. However, neither the parol evidence rule nor an entire agreement clause will operate to prevent the admission of extrinsic evidence if there is a claim for rectification because (i) the essence of a rectification claim is that the agreement as drafted contains a mistake and, therefore, does not properly reflect the entire agreement between the parties; and (ii) extrinsic evidence is necessary to determine whether the agreement as drafted accurately records the parties' common intention and agreement.

It is likely that at common law a judge in a similar case would be able to sidestep the parol evidence rule and entire agreement clause and consider the same evidence considered by Mayer J. in IHAG.

The Rectification Remedy

In IHAG, Mayer J. concluded that the drafting error was an excusable error and, therefore, he was permitted to order the equitable remedy sought by Intrawest.

The common law incorporates the remedy of rectification, which is a narrow equitable remedy designed to remedy cases of mistake and to ensure that one party is not unjustly enriched at the expense of another.10 The essence of the remedy is to correct an inaccurately drafted written agreement so that it conforms to the agreement that the parties intended to make.11 It is a limited remedy and is not available to vary the intentions of the parties or to correct poor business decisions. Although there is some variation based upon the type of mistake alleged, a party seeking rectification is required to (i) establish that the contractual document contains a mistake and, therefore, does not reflect the true agreement between the parties; and (ii) lead strong, clear and convincing evidence of the actual common intention of the parties. Since rectification is an equitable remedy, it is subject to a number of equitable defences, including delay, estoppel and acquiescence.

It is likely that at common law a judge presented with a similar set of facts would engage the equitable remedy of rectification and reach the same result as Mayer J.

Avoiding a Defining Mistake

Although Mayer J.'s decision in IHAG achieved a proper and equitable result in the circumstances, the decision should not be interpreted to mean that counsel should carelessly draft commercial documents on the basis that the rectification remedy will provide full protection if a problem subsequently arises. On the contrary, the decision is a useful reminder that the equitable result was achieved only because of the steps that had been taken, the most significant of which was the preparation of a properly and carefully drafted letter of intent that reflected the common intention of the parties and their agreement on a key term in the transaction. If the letter of intent did not exist at all or was not as carefully drafted as it was, it is likely that the decision could have been significantly different and, perhaps, inequitable.

The best way to avoid the ramifications of a defining mistake is to ensure that the problem does not arise in the first place. This can be achieved by ensuring that all commercial documents, including pre-contractual documents, are properly and carefully drafted. Although rectification is available to correct mistakes that do arise, it is a remedy that should be used only sparingly and then only in the clearest of cases. It therefore does not provide a full measure of protection against drafting errors. The only way to fully protect against unintended circumstances is to avoid or correct drafting errors before it is too late.

There are a number of ways in which counsel can attempt to ensure that their clients (i) avoid drafting mistakes, and (ii) successfully maintain a claim for rectification if a drafting mistake occurs:

  1. Keep it simple. Avoid long and complex definitions and provisions. If appropriate, use mathematical formulas instead of words.
  2. Pay attention to the basics. Avoid treating definitions and boilerplate clauses like block quotes — draft and review them carefully.
  3. Learn as much as you can about the proposed transaction and make sure that the agreement as drafted is consistent with your understanding. Ask your client to do the same.
  4. Get involved in the transaction early and stay involved throughout the process.
  5. Ensure that all pre-contractual documents are drafted as carefully as the actual contract. The precontractual documents may turn out to be more important than the final contract.
  6. If a mistake is discovered, alert the other side and correct the error promptly.

Following these tips is one way to ensure that you avoid making a defining mistake and having your client deal with unnecessary litigation.



  1. IHAG-Holding AG v. Intrawest Corporation, 2009 QCCS 2669. The decision is currently under appeal.
  2. In formulaic terms, the difference is as follows:
    Executed Non-Binding Agreement
    Letter of Intent
    ROPA=(4.8 x cumulative ROPA = (4.8 x cumulative
    EBITDA) - $2 million EBITDA - $2 million)
  3. Supra note 1 at para. 133.
  4. Ibid. at para. 138.
  5. Ibid. at para. 154.
  6. Ibid. at para. 165.
  7. Ibid. at paras. 189, 190 and 192.
  8. Ibid. at para. 201.
  9. Ibid. at paras. 205, 206.
  10. Royal Bank of Canada v. El-Bris Limited, [2008] O.J. No. 3386, 92 O.R. (3d) 779 at para. 13 (C.A.).
  11. Ibid.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.