Canada: Is Bad Work An "Accident"?

Last Updated: March 21 2011
Article by John R. Singleton and Scott Brearly

The Supreme Court of Canada's recent decision in Progressive Homes Ltd. v. Lombard General Insurance Company of Canada represents a major change in the law as it relates to a general liability insurer's duty to defend a contractor against a claim in which it is alleged that the contractor's work or materials are defective and have resulted in damage to other components of the project for which the contractor was contractually responsible.

Before Progressive, the law in British Columbia developed over 19 years to a point where it was generally understood that a claim for the cost of repairing or replacing a contractor's defective work product and related damage to the project was not a claim that triggered the obligation of a general liability insurer to defend the contractor under a policy which provided coverage for the insured's liability arising out of property damage.

Such damage is defined to mean physical injury to, or destruction of, tangible property caused by an occurrence such as an accident or unlooked for mishap or event. The seminal decisions in this area were two B.C. Supreme Court cases: Privest v. Foundation Co. of Canada (1991) and Swagger Construction v. ING Insurance Company of Canada (2005). Both concluded that the cost of repairing defective work and materials was not a claim for physical injury to or destruction of tangible property (i.e. property damage) but rather a claim for pure economic loss.

The Court in Swagger went further. It concluded that the delivery of faulty work product or materials could not be classified as an accident or occurrence in the sense that the activity or lack of activity that resulted in the faulty work product or materials could not be said to have been unexpected or unintended from the contractor's perspective. Even the consequences of the faulty materials or work product, when restricted to work adjacent to or part of the overall work product of the contractor, would not be the result of an occurrence or accident. To the contrary, they are part of an overall obligation, or failure, by the contractor to deliver a project without faulty work product or materials.

The Swagger decision's treatment of the meaning of the term "occurrence" or "accident" was consistent with the Supreme Court of Canada's 2009 decision in Co-operators Life Insurance Co. v. Gibbens. In this case, the Court found that paralysis resulting from a herpes infection was a natural consequence of sexual activity that could not in any sense of the word be described as an accident. Similarly one would have thought that a contractor delivering faulty workmanship or materials could not in any sense of the word be involved in an activity that could be considered accidental. But the Supreme Court of Canada in Progressive thought otherwise.

The law in British Columbia in this area, prior to Progressive, allowed the courts to achieve a particular policy objective. Simply put, the presence of insurance should not be used to obviate a contractor's obligation to perform work in a good and workmanlike manner and to supply materials fit for their intended purpose. If insurance was available to correct such transgressions by the construction industry, contractors would tend to rely on insurers to make good shoddy workmanship and materials and not discharge the contractual obligations placed on them to deliver a project fit for its intended purpose. Although Progressive does not necessarily dismantle this policy objective, it makes some significant inroads in that direction.

The issues in Progressive were familiar: did Lombard owe a defence obligation to a general contractor under its Commercial General Liability (CGL) policy for claims seeking the cost of repairing or replacing faulty workmanship by that general contractor and damage to other building components as a result? The pleadings alleged that Progressive Homes was negligent in its construction of four housing units. The buildings had multiple alleged construction defects and water damage was said to have penetrated other building components as a result. Lombard initially undertook Progressive Homes' defence but withdrew when the Swagger decision was released by the B.C. Supreme Court.

Mr. Justice Marshall Rothstein wrote the Progressive decision for the Supreme Court of Canada. On the question of whether Lombard's policy covered only third party property damage, he noted that there was no restriction in the language of the policy at issue limiting coverage to third party property. Addressing the real issue before the Court, he found that, on a plain reading of the policy's language, it was not clear that defective property per se was excluded from the definition of property damage. In other words, according to the Court, defective construction in and of itself could be property damage (or at least it was not obvious to the Court that it was not property damage).

The test for the duty to defend being whether or not there was a claim advanced which might possibly trigger the duty to indemnify, Justice Rothstein concluded that the duty to defend in the Progressive case arose accordingly. In his opinion the proper forum for determination of whether or not there is in fact property damage in the presence of defective construction, and its immediate consequences, was in a trial of the issues raised in the pleadings and not at the stage of determining whether or not there was a duty to defend those allegations. The pleadings, at least in the Progressive case, met the "low threshold" required to trigger the duty to defend.

On this point: if the Court's mind had been directed towards the remedy the plaintiffs were seeking — and it is not clear from the judgment that the Court was directed to this — then one wonders whether a different result would have arisen. Recognizing that the claim in the case was for the cost of redoing or replacing work product or materials not properly carried out or installed in the first instance would surely be seen as a claim for pure economic loss and not a claim for property damage.

Focusing on the wording of the policy alone, the only issue the Court seems to have addressed on this point is whether or not the presence of faulty workmanship of materials might "possibly" constitute physical damage to or destruction of tangible property. In context, the claim advanced was not one that complained about physical damage to property. Rather, it was one maintaining that the work Progressive Homes had undertaken in the first place was not done properly. Looked at from this perspective, it was not a claim for property damage.

Rejecting the argument that this reasoning would turn the liability policy into a performance bond, Justice Rothstein delineated the difference between a performance bond and a general liability policy. A performance bond, he wrote, guaranteed performance during the course of construction whereas a general liability policy took over once the project was complete. Of course, that is not correct. The general liability policy is in force during the course of construction as well as after. It is required to respond in both time frames provided there is property damage caused by an occurrence. So, if it was important to the result reached by the Court, then the Court was misdirected.

On the question of whether or not defective workmanship or materials might constitute an "accident" or "occurrence", the Court recognized that the answer to this question is to be determined on a case by case basis. It is the underlying facts described as constituting the accident which are important. Once again, Justice Rothstein concluded that it was "possible" defective construction may have been the result of an accident. Although the evidence might eventually demonstrate that that was not the case, the allegation was sufficient to clear the "low threshold" required to trigger the duty to defend.

Consequently, there is no longer a categorical bar militating against a finding that delivery of faulty workmanship or materials constitutes an accident within the meaning of a general liability policy. On this point, the Court was influenced by the reasoning that, where the pleadings allege negligence rather than intentional conduct, the allegations are properly construed as giving rise to the possibility that the delivery of faulty workmanship or materials was an accident. As previously noted, this finding seems to fly in the face of the reasoning of the Supreme Court of Canada in the Gibbens decision. But that debate will have to wait for another day, another case and another fact pattern.

As is common in cases of this nature, the Court went on to consider various work product exclusions found in the various general liability policies issued to Progressive Homes. It first clarified that coverage cannot be found in the wording of exclusions which were not in the original coverage grant and held that "it is generally advisable to interpret the policy in the order described above:

coverage; exclusions; and then exceptions [to the exclusions]." The Court then determined that none of the exclusions were specific enough to preclude the possibility that the allegations made in the case might possibly trigger coverage given by the original coverage grant. The exclusions were either not specific enough in their wording or, the Court found, they were ambiguously worded.

Perhaps the most important aspect of this portion of the judgment in Progressive is the clear guidance given to insurers. If they wish to avoid the prospect of extending coverage to remedy defects in workmanship and materials or the failure to meet contractual obligations, the exclusions in the general liability policy will have to be very clearly and specifically worded. By way of example: excluding coverage of the cost of remedying any actual or alleged "property damage" to the project itself would presumably have avoided the result in Progressive and would have protected underwriters from exposure to the cost of rebuilding a project which their insured did not build properly in the first place. Having regard to the wideranging effects of Progressive, in the arena of duty to defend and, possibly, in the arena of the duty to indemnify, one would expect the insurance industry to react at an early date and tighten up policy wording to make its intentions clear.

On a final note, Progressive is not just about the case's fact pattern. The reasoning and findings in this case will likely awaken a sleeping giant as one would expect insurers will have to revisit earlier declinations of coverage in cases and fact patterns similar to those confronted in Progressive.

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
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.