Canada: Looking Through A Dirty Window: Builders' Risk Policies And The "Faulty Workmanship" Exclusion

Last Updated: April 14 2016
Article by Mark Alexander

On March 30, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada heard argument in the appeal of the Alberta Court of Appeal's decision in Ledcor v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Company.   In doing so, the SCC was asked to consider, among other things, the proper test to distinguish between the concepts of "faulty workmanship" and "resulting damage" in comprehensive builders' risk policies.

The dispute in this case arose in relation to the construction of the EPCOR Tower, a 29 storey office building in Edmonton, Alberta, completed in 2011.  The owner, Station Lands Ltd. ("Station Lands") retained Ledcor Construction Ltd. ("Ledcor") as a construction manager to coordinate construction of the building.  An "All Risks" policy was obtained by Station Lands from a number of insurers to cover all "direct physical loss or damage" subject to certain defined exclusions.  The policy named both Station Lands and Ledcor as insureds, and the additional insureds included the owners, contractors, sub-contractors, architects, engineers, consultants, and all individuals or firms providing services or materials to or for the named insureds.

As the building was nearing completion, Station Lands hired a contractor, Bristol Cleaning ("Bristol"), to perform a "construction clean" of the exterior of the building to remove dirt, paint and other construction debris from the windows.  During the cleaning process, a number of the windows were damaged due to Bristol using inappropriate tools and methods and had to be replaced at considerable cost.

As a result of the damage to the windows, Station Lands and Ledcor made claims under the policy for the costs incurred to replace the windows.  The insurers denied the claims on the grounds that the damage was "faulty workmanship" and was therefore captured by an exclusion:

1.             Property Insured

(a)  Property undergoing site preparation, demolition, construction, reconstruction, fabrication, insulation, erection, repair or testing ...

4(A)        Exclusions 

This policy does not insure ...

(b) the cost of making good faulty workmanship, construction materials or design unless physical damage not otherwise excluded by this policy results, in which event this policy shall insure such resulting damage.

At trial, the judge characterized the question of whether the exclusion under the policy applied as a question of whether "making good" related to the faulty workmanship, being the cleaning of the windows, or to the thing on which the faulty workmanship was performed, in this case, the windows:

In my view, whether cleaning or constructing, as I have said, one is working.  Plainly in this case, the work done by Bristol was faulty.  In the result, I think the words of the exclusion portion of clause 4(A) are clear and free from ambiguity.  The "cost of making good" Bristol's faulty workmanship is excluded.  However, the meaning of the words "making good" in the exclusion portion of clause 4(A) must be determined.  Does "making good" relate to the faulty workmanship, in this case the cleaning?  Does the "making good" relate to the thing on which the faulty workmanship was performed, in this case the building exterior?

Station Lands and Ledcor argued that excluding the cost of "making good" the faulty cleaning simply excluded recovery of the cost for having someone else perform the work correctly, and that Bristol's defective methods and tools were not "faulty workmanship" because no product was created by its efforts.  Conversely, the insurers asserted the correct interpretation of the clause required "making good" to extend to the damage done by the faulty cleaning otherwise the exclusion clause would effectively be rendered meaningless.  The insurers further argued that such an interpretation would make the "all risks" policy become a "no risks" policy, analogizing it to a form of "construction warranty" contract.

The Court found that both of the interpretations advanced were plausible and applied contra proferentem  to conclude that the insurers had failed to establish that the exclusion applied, such that the damage caused to the windows by Bristol was covered under the policy. 

The trial judge's decision was reversed on appeal, with the Court of Appeal finding that the exclusion clause applied in the circumstances.   In its decision, the CA expressed concern over the consequences of narrowly interpreting the faulty workmanship exclusion, stating that the effect of such an interpretation would be to give the insured "carte blanche to use faulty materials, workmanship or design."  The CA also noted the need for certainty in the interpretation of insurance contracts, particularly in the context of standard form policies:

Insurance contracts are a highly specialized form of contract.  "Standard form" wording is common in the industry, and coverage is usually sold under those policies without any negotiation of the terms.  Insureds realize that they are purchasing a standard form of coverage.  In many cases, the contents of the policies are set, or at least highly influenced, by statutory provisions.  The interpretation of insurance policies is therefore of general importance beyond any particular dispute.  Any decision on the proper interpretation of standard form wording in an insurance policy has great precedential value, and the primary objective should be certainty.

In this context, the CA found that the fundamental intent of the policy was to indemnify the owner for a particular type of damage that occurs during construction, and to provide coverage for some unexpected events and occurrences.  It was not, however, intended to be a "building warranty" to ensure that the building was constructed in a good and workmanlike manner, using proper materials.

After a review of the general principles of interpretation, the CA observed that it is often helpful to begin with a sequential analysis when examining policies and their constituent clauses, whereby:

  1. The loss is first reviewed to see whether it falls within the general coverage afforded under the policy;
  2. The exclusions of the policy are then considered to see whether any apply; and
  3. Finally, the court must consider whether the loss is within an exception to a given exclusion clause.

Significantly, however, the CA noted that as the exclusion clause at issue juxtaposed the excluded "cost of making good faulty workmanship" with "resulting damage," which was covered, the exception and exclusion were akin to two sides of the same coin and therefore had to be interpreted symbiotically.

In allowing the appeal, the CA rejected the main arguments asserted by Station Lands and Ledcor:  that the cleaning by Bristol was not within the phrase "workmanship," which the insureds stated only covers efforts that result in the creation of a physical product; and secondly, that the exclusion did not apply to damage caused by one contractor to the work of another.

With respect to the first issue, the CA found that such a narrow interpretation was outside the normal interpretation of the word "workmanship," which encompassed any application of skill or effort to a task.  The court also observed that the construction contract itself defined "Work" as including "services," and referred to the "workmanship" of Bristol, such that the final cleaning of the building exterior was as much a part of the construction as the pouring of the concrete.  Moreover, the CA held that the insureds' argument was not supported by the wording of the policy itself given there was nothing to indicate that only the creation of physical work products was caught by the term "workmanship," particularly as the policy covered all consultants and trade contractors involved in the project, such that it would be inconsistent to then find that the consultants and contractors who did not actually create physical products were not covered.

The CA also rejected the second argument advanced by the insureds, finding that it was artificial to draw a dividing line between the work product created by the work of other contractors, and the work performed by Bristol.  Specifically, the CA held that the insureds' argument would lead to the conclusion that coverage under the policy depended on how the work was divided up, with coverage effectively expanded the more finely divided up the work was, and narrowed or even vitiated if a single contractor did all the work associated with one component of the project.

Ultimately, the court favored the general approach proffered by the insurers; namely, that if the workmanship itself directly caused the damage, then both re-doing the work and fixing the damage from the first attempt fall into the expression "making good faulty workmanship."  The CA concluded that the proper test to be applied in determining whether the exclusion clause applies is one of connectedness between the work, the damage and the physical object being worked upon, and that the primary considerations will be:

  1. The extent or degree to which the damage was to a portion of the project actually being worked on at the time, or was collateral damage to other areas;
  2. The nature of the work being done, how the damage related to the way that work is normally done, and the extent to which the damage is a natural or foreseeable consequence of the work itself; and
  3. Whether the damage was within the purview of normal risks of poor workmanship, or whether it was unexpected and fortuitous.

Finally, the CA did not agree with the trial judge's application of contra proferentem in the circumstances as that doctrine could not be used to create ambiguity and the Supreme Court of Canada had previously held that this type of exclusion was not ambiguous.

As the Supreme Court of Canada has recognized, builders' risk insurance is essential for the administration of construction projects as it reduces the overall insurance costs by reducing the overlaps in coverage, which in turn serves to eliminate litigation amongst insurers over which particular subcontractor was responsible for any particular damage.   Leave to appeal to the SCC is rarely attained, with only approximately 12% of applications granted over the last 10 years.  As such, the significance of determining the proper approach to the interpretation of this important and ubiquitous provision is demonstrated by the SCC's decision to grant leave in this case.  The construction industry and insurers alike anxiously await further guidance on this issue from Canada's highest court.


1 Ledcor Construction Limited v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Company, 2015 ABCA 121 (CanLII)

2 Ledcor Construction Limited v. Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Company, 2013 ABQB 585 (CanLII) at para. 13.

3 A principle of contractual interpretation requiring ambiguous provisions capable of more than one interpretation to be construed against the party responsible for drafting the contract.

4 Supra note 1 at para. 16, citing Progressive Homes Ltd. v Lombard General Insurance Co. of Canada, [2010] 2 SCR 245, 2010 SCC 33 (CanLII)

5 Ibid. at para. 26

6 Ibid. at para. 50  

7 Citing Canadian National Railway Co. v Royal and SunAlliance Insurance Co. of Canada, 2008 SCC 66 (CanLII)

8 Commonwealth Construction Co. Ltd. v. Imperial Oil Ltd. et al., [1978] 1 SCR 317

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.

Mark Alexander
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.