Interpaving takes Greater Sudbury to court over contract ban

Interpaving says its attempts to collect on an unpaid bill of $233,000 from the City of Greater Sudbury is one of the reasons it was banned from bidding on municipal contracts.

It's one of the allegations the company makes in a court challenge that claims the ban and the city bylaw it's based on are illegal. The ban was brought in this March following the death of a pedestrian on a downtown construction site last fall.

"The decision to disqualify Interpaving was made in bad faith and for an ulterior purpose," reads the company's notice of application for a judicial review, which also uses words like "invalid," "abuse" and "Draconian" to describe the city's actions.

In 2014, Interpaving filed a lawsuit against the city for $233,000 for extra work done on five contracts it claims it was never paid for.

That lawsuit is still on the books and the company now claims this was cited as a reason why it was banned from bidding on any city jobs earlier this year, as the city's by-law Governing Procurement Policies and Procedures listing litigation against the city as reason to bar a contractor.

In asking the court for a judicial review, Interpaving argues this violates its right under provincial laws and the Charter of Rights to take a government to court.

The company claims in court documents that the city cited general poor performance and "a significant history of abusive behaviour and threatening conduct directed from Interpaving owners and employees towards City employees" going back to 2003 in its decision.

But Interpaving says these were never raised in regular meetings with city officials and that the ban came without warning.

That ban on municipal work was brought in this March, several months after 58-year-old Cecile Paquette was killed during the repaving of Elgin Street, part of the $14.6 million worth of city work the company did in 2015.

"On its face, the decision does not seek to protect the city and its finances, but instead, it seeks to create a scapegoat for a tragic accident and thereby minimize the city's own role and duties," Interpaving argues in the court documents.

The company also claims the city's unfair decision has "tarnished" its reputation and had a "devastating impact" on its business.

City defends bylaw

In a statement the City of Greater says:

"The City has the authority to manage its relationships with contractors under the Purchasing By-law. 

As such, Interpaving Limited was banned from submitting bids to the City under Section 37 of this by-law, which allows the City to exclude a bidder or supplier for a number of reasons. 

The City will be defending its decision through the court process. As this is a legal matter, we cannot provide further comment."

This is just the latest legal proceeding tied to the crushing death on Elgin Street last year.

The provincial government has laid health and safety act charges against Interpaving and the city, set to be heard in court next week.

And the Paquette family has also filed a lawsuit against the city and Interpaving for $2 million in damages.