Lest casual readers get the wrong idea, the majority only cites the Quebec Civil Code in three paragraphs at the end of their argument in order to dismiss a certain line of argument from the parties. They write, "There is, of course, no question of applying Quebec law to this dispute". Of course, it is possible for an inquisitive mind to find affinities with the CCQ throughout the decision. Whether this amounts to what Professor Serafin calls "draw[ing] heavily on the CCQ" is matter of interpretation.

We can interpret Wastech as either setting out a common law good faith (with civilian influences) or an inappropriately civilian good faith, basically applying the CCQ in BC. I do not think the first option is too difficult to perform, and if we want to stop future litigants from "asking the courts to apply the CCQ to fix their problems" it seems likely to be more productive. This is why I called the concurrence's concerns about majority "reliance" on the CCQ minor.