ABSTRACT
This chapter considers the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in Bhasin v Hrynew (2014), and assesses its likely effect in Canadian law and in the law of other Commonwealth jurisdictions. Bhasin v Hrynew seeks to recognize and establish a ‘general organizing principle’ of good faith, which is intended to explain and justify various aspects of contract law, including the cases on implied terms and on unfairness. This chapter suggests that there are difficulties in identifying a single principle that explains both interpretation and unfairness, and that there are ambiguities in the judgment on the crucial question of whether the test of good faith is subjective (honesty) or objective (reasonableness). Some later Canadian cases have given the case a narrow interpretation, but the last word has not necessarily been spoken: at the time of writing (September, 2019) three cases on good faith are pending before the Supreme Court of Canada.
