Centennial Bridge construction lawsuit could cause closures

Subcontractor wants to remove unfinished trestle

Next week the Centennial Bridge is going to be partially closed, allowing only one lane of traffic for the entire week as work continues on the bridge’s $100 million rehabilitation. The work being undertaken at the moment is the refurbishment and strengthening of the piers. It’s not clear if that work was going to cause the traffic interruptions, but a recent lawsuit between the construction company and the subcontractor may have something to do with it.

In 2021 Julmac Contracting was bidding on the work and contacted a Miramichi construction company, Greenfield Construction, to come on as a subcontractor. The companies signed a letter of intent, and on May 5th 202 Greenfield set to work building a work trestle, a temporary bridge from the north shore of the river reaching out 240 meters into the water beside the piers.

The trestle was to be a 20 foot wide work platform from which the refurbishment of the piers could be done. The temporary bridge was to be built with iron pilings, steel beams and timber, and was supposed to be completed in the month of May 2022. Greenfield would then be responsible for removing it in February 2023, putting it back in after the ice run in April, and removing again after the work was finished. Greenfield was going to be paid $7.2 million for the work and was going to be permitted to keep the materials used in the trestle construction. They were also going to be paid $108,000 a month for each month the trestle was used.

In July only 80 meters of the 240m trestle had been completed and JULMAC also claimed that deadlines were missed, engineering drawings were late, and when they did come they were rejected by DTI. In mid-July JULMAC fired Greenfield and ordered them off the site, and said they had arranged for another method of doing the work using boats and barges.

Greenfield invoiced JULMAC for $599,000 for the work completed to date, but JULMAC did not pay, and hasn’t paid Greenfield any money since the start of the project. JULMAC says the contract between them and Greenfield was never formalized and that because of the missed deadlines they have experienced losses of $9 million.

Greenfield sued JULMAC and also made a motion that the court allow them on the site to remove the unfinished trestle because they say they can use the materials for a wharf project in PEI.  JULMAC argued the removal of the bridge would take to long and cause significant construction interruptions. 

Justice Fred Ferguson heard the motion on October 31st and issued a decision on November 11th siding with Greenfield. (The information above comes from that decision). For various reasons Ferguson agreed the material used in the unfinished work bridge belonged to Greenfield, but in his decision said that Greenfield could only have access to the construction site when JULMAC wasn’t there leaving only Saturdays at 6pm to Mondays at 6am. Greenfield must also guarantee that the deconstruction will in no way impede the work JULMAC is doing.

Because the trestle was not completed, cement trucks must now use the centennial bridge to delver the cement rather than from below on the trestle.

Ferguson awarded costs for the motion hearing to Greenfield, but any damages sought by the parties regarding their contract with each other will have to be settled at a separate trial.