Richard Harrison is a well-known Canadian athlete who has successfully participated in several Olympics.

The Town of Aurora decides to build a school after Richard, and hires P-Rash Inc. to do so. P-Rash hires a number of subcontractors to create, install the steel components of the school, including Steel Co Inc. Much of these subcontracts were never completed after 2 years of construction, but Steel Co In. still believes it is entitled to get paid.

P-Rash hires an inspector and finds a number of deficiencies in Steel Co's work. In calculating the damages they are seeking, the parties dispute whether a 10% holdback should be included in any calculation of expectation damages. The holdback is not included in any of the subcontracts, but is a rather standard practice in this industry for construction subcontracts. However, neither party is able to provide any evidence that they contemplated the chargeback at the time of signing the contract.

How does foreseeability play a role in the calculation of expectation damages in cases such as this? How could P-Rash strengthen its claim in court for the chargebacks, if they pursue this claim?