An Ontario construction company has been dealt another legal blow in its fight against the New Brunswick government over three major bridge projects.
New Brunswick Court of Appeal Justice Kathleen Quigg dismissed Julmac Contracting Ltd.’s motion seeking to appeal a lower court’s choice not to grant an injunction that would have allowed its employees to return to work on the three projects.
Speaking to lawyers for the two parties in court Friday, Quigg said she did not think Julmac had satisfied criteria needed for an appeal to go forward.
She said she also found no reason to doubt the correctness of Court of King’s Bench Justice Richard Petrie’s earlier decision denying the injunction request.
“Overall, the moving party has not convinced me that the proposed appeal would have had a reasonable possibility of success,” Quigg said.
Quigg dismissed Julmac’s motion and ordered the company to pay $1,500 in costs to the province.
The decision marks the latest chapter in a feud between the New Brunswick government and Julmac, which had been contracted by the province to do work on the Anderson and Centennial bridges in Miramichi, as well as the Mactaquac Dam bridge near Fredericton.
However, the relationship between the two parties soured in 2023, with Julmac filing a free trade complaint and civil lawsuit alleging the province applied stricter standards to its work than to New Brunswick companies.
The allegations haven’t been tested in court, but on Feb. 20, the province abruptly ordered Julmac to remove itself from the three projects.
Julmac filed a motion in the Court of King’s Bench asking for an interlocutory injunction that would effectively allow its employees to resume work, arguing the injunction would prevent “irreparable harm” from coming to it and its 120 employees while it pursued legal action against the province for removing it from the projects.
On March 28, Petrie denied the injunction request, writing that the court did not have jurisdiction to grant one under the Proceedings Against the Crown Act.
Lawyers make arguments
Earlier Friday, lawyers for Julmac and the province argued for and against allowing an appeal of Petrie’s decision.
Julmac lawyer Shalom Cumbo-Steinmetz argued there was case law where an injunction had been granted under similar circumstances.
“There’s good reason to doubt the correctness of the decision [by Petrie],” Cumbo-Steinmetz said. “Appellate intervention is needed.”
Mark Heighton, lawyer for the province, disagreed, arguing the cases cited were different in circumstances from the facts in this case.
Heighton added that an injunction in this case would effectively act as “final relief” in favour of Julmac. He urged Quigg to dismiss the motion.
New contracts awarded
Part of Julmac’s request for an injunction also sought to prevent the province from awarding contracts for the three projects to other companies.
On Friday, Frederick McElman, a lawyer for the province, revealed that contracts had been awarded this week to complete the work on the Mactaquac Dam bridge, as well as the Anderson Bridge, though he did not say which companies received them.
CBC News has asked the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure for information about the three projects.
Under the Proceedings Against the Crown Act, Julmac had to give the province 60 days’ notice before filing a lawsuit for being removed from the projects.
Cumbo-Steinmetz said that notice period means Julmac can’t file its lawsuit until May 12.
