Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism.
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
Just$1.99
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to globeandmail.com
Just $1.99per week for the first 24weeks
Just $1.99per week for the first 24weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(select.open)}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](select.open),dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); } //

A line-up of cars waiting to drop off garbage at Wastech in North Vancouver.

LAURA LEYSHON/The Globe and Mail

The obligation to show good faith in the performance of a contract stops short of harming one’s own interests, the Supreme Court has ruled.

The ruling came in a dispute between a waste management company and a government board in Vancouver. It is important for businesses, because it puts limits on what good faith requires of each party to a contract. At the same time, the ruling underlines that parties must act reasonably, not just honestly, when contracts allow them discretion in their conduct.

In 2014, the court said that good faith and honesty are central to contract law, barring the parties from lying to or misleading each other. In December, the court said that dishonesty can include misleading through silence, or failing to correct a misimpression.

Story continues below advertisement

No dishonesty was alleged in the dispute between Wastech Services Ltd. and the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, a board responsible for overseeing waste disposal. The issue was whether the municipal board had used discretion allowed by the contract to serve its own interests at the expense of the company’s, thus violating its obligation to deal fairly and in good faith with Wastech.

Wastech had a 20-year contract with the city, and was responsible for delivering waste to three sites; the further away the sites, the more money it made. The contract left it to the municipality’s “absolute discretion” to alter the proportion of waste it sent to the three sites. And while Wastech had a target profit written into the contract, it did not have a guarantee that the municipality would meet that target.

The Vancouver board chose, 15 years into the deal, to send more of its waste to a closer site in the name of cost-effectiveness. Wastech accused it of acting unfairly, and sought damages. The two sides had a long-standing relationship based on trust, the company said, and in such a situation, the municipality had broken with the company’s reasonable expectations.

The unfairness, the company told the Supreme Court in a legal filing, was that the city “reduced its waste allocations to reduce its own costs knowing that this would make it impossible” for Wastech to meet its profit target in 2011.

But the Supreme Court unanimously disagreed.

“Wastech is asking for [the municipality’s] discretion to be constrained so that it can achieve a result – an advantage – for which it did not bargain and, in fact, that it might have been said to have bargained away,” Justice Nicholas Kasirer wrote on behalf of himself and five other judges.

The loyalty required of the municipality was “loyalty to the bargain, not loyalty to Wastech.” Courts must look at whether discretion allowed by a contract was “reasonable” – that is, used in a way that is consistent with the purposes of that contract, such as cost-effectiveness. He added that it is unnecessary to “act selflessly.”

Story continues below advertisement

Three other judges would have gone further to limit the good-faith requirement when a party uses its discretion in the exercise of a contractual power. Justice Malcolm Rowe, Justice Russell Brown and Justice Suzanne Côté said “loyalty” to the shared business venture or contract had no place in the dispute.

“Such a starting point risks, even invites, undermining freedom of contract and distorting the parties’ bargain by imposing constraints to which they did not agree,” Justice Brown and Justice Rowe wrote for the group of three.

Wastech declined comment.

Irwin Nathanson, a lawyer for the board in the dispute, called the decision “extremely important.”

“My client is pleased with the result … and the clarity provided with respect to the doctrine of contractual good faith performance,” he said.

Jeremy Opolsky, a lawyer in Torys litigation group in Toronto, said the court’s ruling will give comfort to the business community. “What is reasonable and fair is defined foremost by the contract itself and, within that framework, they can make business decisions in their interest,” said Mr. Opolsky, who represented the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, an intervenor in the case.

Story continues below advertisement

Brandon Kain, a lawyer with McCarthy Tétrault in Toronto, who was not involved in the case, said the ruling confirms that “good faith requires discretionary contractual powers to be exercised in a manner that is reasonable, not only in a manner that is honest.”

John McCamus, a professor emeritus at Osgoode Hall Law School, said the court had “reaffirmed and strengthened its embrace of an underlying general principle requiring contract parties to perform their contractual obligations in good faith.”

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies