You are here

Contempt of court by breach of the implied taking

The traditional common law approach is that breach of an implied undertaking constitutes contempt of court: Sandbar Construction Ltd. v. Howon Industries Ltd. (1998) 58 BCLR (3d) 55 (SC); Lac d'Amiante du Québec Ltée v. 2858-0702 Québec Inc., 2001 SCC 51; Home Office v. Harman, [1983] 1 A.C. 280 (H.L.); Carbone v. De La Rocha (1993), 13 O.R. (3d) 355 (Gen. Div.); Orfus Realty v. D.G. Jewellery of Canada Ltd. (1995), 24 O.R. (3d) 379 (CA).
 
In Sandbar Construction Ltd. v. Howon Industries Ltd., 1998 CanLII 6562 (BC SC) the court applied the contempt remedy to the breach of the implied undertaking.
 
 
This book was written by Michael Dew, a Vancouver lawyer who practices civil litigation, including representing claimants in motor vehicle accident claims, persons who have been denied insurance coverage by insurance companies, and persons dealing with builders lien issues.