An internal trade dispute has emerged as an Ontario-based contractor, Julmac Contracting Ltd., takes New Brunswick’s government to task, claiming it violated the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) in the awarding of bridge repair contracts. This case marks a significant moment in Canadian interprovincial trade, as it is the first to be heard by the internal trade tribunal established under the CFTA, which replaced the previous Agreement on Internal Trade in 2017.
Dispute Overview
The conflict revolves around three bridge projects in New Brunswick, particularly the Centennial Bridge in Miramichi, which spans the Miramichi River. Julmac alleges that the provincial government favourably discriminated against local contractors, thereby disadvantaging out-of-province firms. The New Brunswick government, however, contends that the issue is not one of trade discrimination, but rather a matter of Julmac’s failure to meet contractual obligations.
During the tribunal session held at the University of New Brunswick’s Faculty of Law, Julmac’s counsel, David Outerbridge, articulated the firm’s position, stating, “The question for the panel is: Did the government of New Brunswick honour that promise? If there’s been a breach, a remedy should be awarded.” This sets the stage for a crucial examination of the CFTA’s provisions regarding fair treatment for interprovincial contractors.
Historical Context
Interprovincial trade barriers have long impeded economic growth in Canada, costing the economy an estimated $92 billion annually. The implementation of the CFTA in 2017 was intended to facilitate smoother trade relations across provincial lines. Recent pressures on Canada’s economy, exacerbated by external factors such as U.S. trade policies and the ongoing review of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), have further highlighted the need for cohesive internal trade practices.
In light of these challenges, Prime Minister Mark Carney has advocated for a unified Canadian economy, aiming to reduce reliance on the United States. Despite some efforts to dismantle trade barriers, the effectiveness of these initiatives remains inconsistent.
The Hearing and Its Proceedings
The tribunal hearing comprises three legal professionals: chair Valerie Hughes, Robert Deane, and Drew Tyler. They will hear testimonies from both sides, including representatives from Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, who have been allowed to intervene in the proceedings. The dispute has roots that stretch back several years, but it intensified in February 2025 when New Brunswick’s Department of Transportation and Infrastructure ordered Julmac to vacate its worksites, escalating tensions between the contractor and provincial authorities.
In its legal filing, Julmac pointed to specific instances of what it claims are unreasonable standards imposed upon it, such as increased material requirements for temporary moulds used in the bridge construction. Outerbridge asserted, “What we’re asking for is simply a level playing field,” emphasising the need for fair treatment for out-of-province contractors.
Conversely, New Brunswick’s legal representative, Mark Heighton, countered these claims, arguing that the contractor’s difficulties stem from its own performance rather than any discriminatory practices by the province. He stated, “There is no discriminatory treatment… what you don’t see in the evidence is a local contractor proposing to use the same methods as Julmac and being told it’s not okay.”
Conclusion and Next Steps
The hearing is expected to wrap up on Friday, with the panel anticipated to deliver its report within 45 days post-hearing. This case serves as a pivotal moment for the future of interprovincial trade relations in Canada, as its outcome may set significant precedents regarding how provinces engage with contractors from outside their borders.
Why it Matters
The implications of this dispute extend far beyond the immediate parties involved. A ruling in favour of Julmac could signal a shift towards greater accountability within provincial governments regarding their obligations under the CFTA, potentially fostering a more equitable trading environment across Canada. As the nation grapples with economic pressures and the complexities of interprovincial trade, the outcomes of this panel could reshape the landscape for future infrastructure projects and interprovincial commerce, paving the way for a more integrated Canadian economy.
