Engineering Professional Liability

A design claim alleges that drawings or calculations fell below the standard expected of a reasonable engineer. We test the allegation against the code requirements in force when the drawings were sealed and the information available to the engineer at that time. A later project failure does not by itself establish professional negligence.

Before construction, the registered professional of record seals a Schedule B letter of assurance and commits to field review of the work. At completion, a Schedule C-B addresses substantial compliance with the BC Building Code. We review both letters against the field reports, site photographs and project record, and distinguish field-review obligations from responsibility for supervising the contractor’s work.

Geotechnical reports and depreciation reports may be relied on by parties who did not retain the engineer. Our review starts with the stated purpose of the report, its limitations and the information available to the engineer. We assess whether the alleged reliance falls within the duty the engineer assumed.

Injury and property damage actions may name an engineer alongside contractors, owners and other project participants. We have acted for professional engineers in multimillion-dollar personal injury claims involving allegations of negligent design and construction oversight. We assess the competing expert evidence, the engineer’s scope of responsibility and any contribution or indemnity claims among the defendants.

We represent owners and developers where settlement, cracking or other building damage is alleged to originate in structural or foundation design. We distinguish potential design issues from soil conditions, workmanship, later alterations and maintenance, then use that analysis to identify the responsible parties and assess their contribution to the loss.

We act for strata corporations and owners in claims involving water ingress and building-envelope failures, including defects discovered years after occupancy. Our lawyers review the consultant’s design and field-review record alongside any home warranty claim. We also identify the limitation and warranty deadlines that may affect recovery.

A design issue discovered during construction can require redesign, interrupt work and produce related delay claims. We assess redesign fees, standby costs and other claimed losses against the particular design issue and the date it was identified. We also distinguish those costs from additional scope introduced by the owner or other project participants.

After paying a property or builders risk loss, an insurer may pursue recovery against an engineer or other consultant alleged to have caused the damage. We act on subrogated claims and assess at the outset how the project contracts, including any waiver of subrogation, affect the insurer’s right of recovery.

An engineer facing a claim may have contribution or indemnity claims against contractors, subconsultants or other project participants. We assess which parties should be added based on the contracts, the allegations and the available expert evidence, with attention to the responsibility attributed to each participant.

Engineering claims involving several project participants often require the court to allocate fault among them. Joint and several liability can also affect the amount one defendant may ultimately be required to pay. We develop the apportionment case alongside the liability defence so that the evidence addresses both the engineer’s conduct and the responsibility of the other parties.

Engineers sued in construction proceedings may have contribution claims against others involved in the project. Section 16 of the Limitation Act establishes a separate discovery rule for those claims. We identify contribution issues and the applicable dates when the defence is first assessed rather than waiting until the underlying action is advanced.

We act in disputes between prime consultants and subconsultants, including claims arising where an owner alleges deficiencies in work designed by a subconsultant. We review the subconsultant agreement to determine the allocation of responsibility, applicable indemnities and any contractual limits on liability.

Many engineering disputes involve disagreement over what the engineer was retained to do. We determine the scope from the signed agreement, amendments and project correspondence, particularly where responsibilities changed during the project. We assess alleged omissions against that scope while also considering any separate duty to warn of an apparent hazard.

Standard consulting agreements, including ACEC 31 and CCDC 31, may limit liability by amount, time or type of claim. We review the wording and enforceability of those provisions and raise them early where they may materially affect the engineer’s exposure or the value of the claim.

Contractual indemnities can create exposure beyond the liabilities ordinarily covered by professional liability insurance. Our lawyers compare the consulting agreement with the policy terms to identify contractual obligations that may fall outside coverage. We also review waivers and exclusions affecting consequential losses and other categories of damages.

A claim for unpaid engineering fees may be met with allegations that the services were deficient. We assess the value of the fee claim against the potential exposure raised by a negligence counterclaim before proceedings begin. For owners withholding payment, we examine the alleged deficiencies and the evidence supporting the amount withheld.

Professional liability policies commonly require prompt notice of a claim and may also require notice of circumstances that could lead to one. Delay in reporting a demand or potential claim can affect coverage. We review the policy’s notice requirements and assist with reporting the matter to the insurer.

A proceeding can include both covered and uncovered allegations, particularly where negligence claims appear alongside fee disputes or contractual indemnities. We advise engineers on reservation of rights issues and the treatment of defence costs where coverage is disputed or divided.

An engineering firm may have direct exposure through its deductible or for amounts exceeding available policy limits. We assess that exposure alongside potential joint and several liability and the available contractual protections. The analysis also informs the firm’s position in settlement discussions.

Professional liability claims frequently depend on expert evidence concerning the applicable standard of care and technical cause of the loss. We retain experts from the relevant engineering discipline and provide the design file, field-review record and other material required for an informed opinion. We also assess the opposing expert evidence for disciplinary, factual and methodological weaknesses.

Building defects can emerge years after design or field review work was completed. We identify the applicable limitation dates when the file opens, including the general discovery period, the 15-year ultimate limitation period under the Limitation Act and any contractual time bar in the consulting agreement.

A civil negligence claim and a complaint to Engineers and Geoscientists British Columbia can arise from the same project. We coordinate the engineer’s position in both proceedings, with our EGBC discipline practice addressing the regulatory process.

We prepare engineering professional liability matters for trial in the Supreme Court of British Columbia and for arbitration where required by the consulting agreement. We also represent clients in mediation and negotiated resolution, with positions grounded in the contractual record, technical evidence and expert opinions developed for the dispute.