Law360 Canada ( June 15, 2018, 8:37 AM EDT) -- Appeal by Information Systems Architects from a motion judge’s decision awarding the respondent, Mohamed, damages in a consulting services dispute. The appellant had engaged the respondent to provide technological consulting services under an Independent Consulting Agreement (“ICA”) for a six-month project, in which the parties agreed the respondent was to be an independent contractor. The project was with Canadian Tire, whose agreement with the appellant had a term that the appellant would not send a consultant that had a criminal record unless Canadian Tire consented. The respondent left his full-time employment to work full-time under the contract. Before being assigned to the project and signing the ICA, he told the appellant he had a dated criminal record and agreed to a background check. After he worked at Canadian Tire for one month, Canadian Tire learned about the criminal record, asked the appellant to replace the respondent and ultimately the respondent’s engagement was terminated. The respondent sued the appellant for breach of contract claiming six months’ remuneration for the fixed term contract. The parties moved for summary judgment. The motion judge found that the appellant breached a duty of good faith by failing to use the termination clause in good faith, that the termination clause was void for vagueness, that Mohamed was an independent contractor and that the ICA was a fixed term contract. On appeal, the appellant argued the motion judge made extricable errors of law in his approach to interpreting the contract, and that he erred in law in finding the termination clause was void for vagueness and concluding the respondent did not need to mitigate his damages or account for monies earned in mitigation....