This Act intervenes in a single procurement dispute arising from a travel‑nurse arrangement in New Brunswick. It uses express legislative authority to alter the legal position created by a previously executed contract and to limit legal recourse tied to that change.
The law is tightly focused on one agreement and on protecting the Crown and public actors from claims that would otherwise flow from cancelling that agreement. That combination makes it a useful case study in how governments use statute to achieve finality in procurement disputes — and why commercial counterparties and affected workers need to read the fine print.
At a Glance
What It Does
The Act extinguishes the legal force of a specified December 2, 2022 agreement between Vitalité Health Network (Regional Health Authority A) and 9059822 Canada Inc. (Canadian Health Labs) and removes the province’s exposure to lawsuits arising from that enactment. It also defines the Minister reference used throughout the Act.
Who It Affects
Directly affected parties are Vitalité Health Network (Regional Health Authority A), the named contractor (9059822 Canada Inc. / Canadian Health Labs), the provincial Crown and its Minister, regional health authority boards and officers, and employees or agents tied to the contract. Courts and administrative tribunals in the province are also affected because the Act precludes them from hearing related claims.
Why It Matters
The bill combines retroactive contract termination with broad ouster language that bars civil and administrative proceedings, including dismissal claims, tied to that termination. That approach changes the legal remedy landscape for contractors and workers and signals a willingness by a province to use targeted legislation to resolve procurement disputes.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Section 1 sets up only one defined term used later: “Minister,” defined to include a delegate. The Act does not create an ongoing regulatory scheme; its scope is limited to the named parties and to the Minister’s role for administration.
The core operative provision declares the December 2, 2022 agreement between Vitalité Health Network (listed as Regional Health Authority A) and 9059822 Canada Inc. (doing business as Canadian Health Labs) to be null and void. The statute says this result holds regardless of any contractual clause (it cites “despite section 9 of that agreement”), so the legislature expressly overrides the agreement’s own terms that might have prevented unilateral termination or limited legislative interference.Two follow-up subsections shut down remedies that would normally survive a contract cancellation.
The first bars any civil, administrative or other proceeding in New Brunswick courts or tribunals against the Crown, the Minister, regional health authorities, boards, committees, officers, executives, directors, employees, members or agents that arises from this statutory nullification or from breaches flowing from it. The second subsection narrows in on dismissal claims, explicitly preventing any action for dismissal — whether express, implied or constructive — against the same public actors when the claim arises from the Act or its legal consequences.Taken together, the Act produces finality: it removes the contract, extinguishes the normal package of contractual remedies against the Crown and named public actors, and forecloses dismissal claims connected to that cancellation.
The instrument is narrowly targeted by party and date, but its mechanics — retroactive nullification plus an ouster of jurisdiction — have outsized effects on the private contractor, affected staff, and adjudicative bodies within the province.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Section 1 defines “Minister” to include any person the Minister designates to act on the Minister’s behalf.
Subsection 2(1) declares null and void the December 2, 2022 agreement between Vitalité Health Network (Regional Health Authority A) and 9059822 Canada Inc. (Canadian Health Labs).
The Act overrides contractual protections by applying the nullification “despite section 9” of the agreement, indicating legislative primacy over specific contract terms.
Subsection 2(2) removes the ability to bring any action, application or proceeding in New Brunswick courts or administrative bodies against a broad list of public actors for claims tied to the Act or breaches that arise from it.
Subsection 2(3) specifically bars any proceeding for dismissal — express, implied or constructive — against the Crown or listed public actors when the dismissal claim arises from this enactment or the breach it causes.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions — who acts for the Minister
This short section provides a single operative definition: “Minister” includes any person the Minister designates. Practically, that delegates administrative authority and gives the government flexibility in who carries out obligations under the Act; it also narrows avenues for targeted challenges by pointing any inquiry at the Minister or their designate rather than to an individual official.
Contract annulled (named agreement)
This subsection names the parties (Vitalité Health Network and 9059822 Canada Inc.), the date (December 2, 2022) and declares the agreement null and void. The clause “despite section 9 of that agreement” signals that the legislature intentionally displaces specific contractual protections or non‑termination clauses. For the named contractor, this is not a negotiated termination — it is a legislative erasure of the contract's legal effect.
Broad bar on civil and administrative proceedings against public actors
This provision ousts jurisdiction: it prevents any action, application or proceeding in provincial courts or administrative bodies against the Crown or an enumerated list of public actors (Minister, regional health authorities, boards, committees, officers, executives, directors, employees, members and agents) arising from the enactment or from breaches caused by it. Functionally, it extinguishes ordinary enforcement and damages remedies for those claims within New Brunswick’s adjudicative fora.
Specific exclusion of dismissal claims
Beyond general ouster language, this subsection expressly forbids proceedings for dismissal — including claims that would ordinarily be styled as wrongful dismissal, constructive dismissal or similar employment actions — against the Crown or listed public actors when the cause is the Act or a breach flowing from it. It removes a class of personal employment remedies that could otherwise survive a contractual change and limits redress for individuals whose employment status changed because of the statute.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- The Crown and the Province of New Brunswick — the Act removes potential financial exposure and litigation risk tied to the named agreement by extinguishing the contract and barring proceedings against the Crown and many public actors.
- Regional Health Authority A / Vitalité Health Network — the legislative nullification relieves the health authority from contractual obligations in that specific agreement and shields its board, officers and employees from related claims in provincial forums.
- Public officers and delegated officials — executives, directors, board members and designated Ministerial delegates gain express statutory protection from civil, administrative and dismissal proceedings connected to this enactment, reducing personal liability risk.
Who Bears the Cost
- 9059822 Canada Inc. (Canadian Health Labs) — the contractor named in the Act loses contractual rights, remedies and the ability to pursue provincial legal or administrative proceedings tied to that contract’s cancellation.
- Employees and contractors tied to the agreement — staff whose positions or contracts are affected by the nullification face reduced avenues for employment relief because dismissal claims arising from the Act are barred in provincial fora.
- Provincial courts and administrative tribunals — the Act removes a class of disputes from their dockets, limiting their role to matters not connected to this statutory intervention and raising questions about lost access to adjudication for affected private parties.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between the government’s interest in achieving immediate finality and protecting public finances and officials, versus private parties’ interest in contractual stability and access to judicial or administrative remedies; the statute resolves one side by legislative fiat but, in doing so, creates unresolved legal and practical costs for contractors, workers and the rule‑of‑law principles that underpin commercial relations.
The Act trades finality for commercial certainty. On one hand, the province achieves an immediate and clear legal result: the named contract no longer operates and public actors are insulated from litigation that could be expensive or politically sensitive.
On the other hand, outright legislative nullification and a broad ouster of proceedings significantly reduce private parties’ expectations that contracts will be enforced and that courts will be available to resolve disputes.
Implementation raises follow‑on questions the text does not resolve. The statute names a single contractor and one health authority but does not spell out how third‑party subcontractors, insurers, or downstream vendors should be treated, nor does it address accounting for payments already made or liabilities already incurred.
The ouster language is province‑wide and categorical; while it forecloses provincial forums, it does not expressly address potential federal or extra‑provincial remedies (for example, in other jurisdictions or under federal statutes), leaving some uncertainty about the full universe of possible claims.
Finally, the Act’s bar on dismissal claims creates a gap in employment remedies for persons affected by the statutory cancellation. That raises administrative‑law and labour‑law tensions: workers and contractors who lose compensation or positions because of the statute may need to seek relief through avenues the Act does not contemplate, or may have no remedy on provincial forums at all, increasing the risk of cascade disputes outside the province or through political rather than judicial channels.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.