The New Brunswick government is disputing allegations that it favoured in-province firms over an Ontario-based contractor, telling a three-member panel the complaint is a routine contract fight, not a breach of interprovincial trade rules.
Dispute framed as contractual, not discriminatory
Lawyers for the province argued during opening remarks that the matter before the panel, convened under the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, concerns the fallout from contractual disagreements and not actions designed to keep out-of-province businesses from government work.
"This case is simple," said Mark Heighton, counsel for the province, describing the matter as "a contractual dispute between the province of New Brunswick and Julmac, and the fallout from the contract dispute."
Julmac Contracting Ltd., which is pursuing a separate $29.4-million breach-of-contract lawsuit against New Brunswick, has alleged the province imposed requirements that disadvantaged it relative to local contractors. The company claims it was forced to use more expensive materials, was subject to stricter penalties for missed deadlines and faced slower approvals on plans.
Projects at the centre of the complaint
The complaint covers several infrastructure contracts awarded in New Brunswick. Among the works cited are:
- replacement work at the Anderson Bridge in Miramichi;
- refurbishment tasks linked to the Mactaquac Dam bridge;
- repairs to parts of the Centennial Bridge in Miramichi;
- work on the Nashwaak Bridge near Marysville in the Fredericton area.
Julmac’s lawyer, David Outerbridge, compared the province’s actions to protectionist approaches, arguing the conduct reflected the same sort of anti-competitive thinking that underpinned high-profile trade measures elsewhere.
Provincial counsel countered that Julmac’s evidence failed to identify any concrete instance of discriminatory treatment. The government also noted that, after Julmac was removed from work on the Centennial Bridge, a firm from another province was selected to complete that contract, which the province said undermines a claim of protectionism.
First hearing under current trade pact
The panel — composed of trade lawyers from Ontario and British Columbia — is scheduled to hear the case over five days. The proceeding is notable as the first hearing under the current version of the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, the 2017 accord that aims to reduce barriers among provinces.
Three other provincial governments — Ontario, Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan — have taken part in the process in some capacity, according to the hearing record.
| Project | Location |
|---|---|
| Anderson Bridge replacement | Miramichi |
| Mactaquac Dam bridge refurbishment | Mactaquac area |
| Centennial Bridge repairs | Miramichi |
| Nashwaak Bridge work | Marysville / Fredericton area |
The hearing record and submissions will determine whether procedural differences and contract terms amount to discrimination under the trade agreement or whether they are matters for ordinary contract law and the parallel civil claim for damages.
Officials and legal representatives will continue presenting evidence over the remainder of the five-day hearing. The panel’s findings could have implications for how provinces structure procurement rules and manage contractors on major infrastructure projects.
— Zoe Novak, New Brunswick News Correspondent
