Facts:

• Marrbeck was contracted by WCC 40 for building envelope remediation and subcontracted Transcona for roofing work.
• Disputes arose over unpaid invoices and alleged work deficiencies.
• Marrbeck sought summary judgment for $1,272,917.20, while Transcona claimed $1,184,388.01.

Claims:

• Transcona: Sought payment for unpaid invoices and work performed.
• Marrbeck: Claimed certified payment and additional work costs.

Defenses:

• WCC 40: Argued the work was deficient and inappropriate for summary judgment due to conflicting expert evidence.

Rulings:

1. Summary Judgment: The court found the case suitable for summary judgment, favoring CKP's project assessment over other expert opinions.
2. Payment: Marrbeck and Transcona were deemed to have performed the work. CKP’s certifications were binding, and WCC 40 failed to use the contract’s dispute resolution mechanism.
3. Deficiencies: CKP's assessed deficiencies ($201,500) were accepted, rejecting WCC 40's higher claims.
4. Mitigation: WCC 40 failed to allow remediation by Marrbeck and Transcona, violating their duty to mitigate.
5. Liabilities:
   • Marrbeck: Ordered to pay Transcona $1,184,388.01.
   • WCC 40: Ordered to pay Marrbeck $1,497,929.01.

Conclusion:

• Summary judgment favored Marrbeck and Transcona, awarding them the claimed amounts and dismissing WCC 40's deficiency counterclaims, with costs.