Application to remove a sole arbitrator of a complex construction dispute due to alleged apprehension of bias dismissed. The Arbitrator was selected for his construction expertise and was permitted to question witnesses and ask questions at any time during the hearing under a procedural order. The arbitrator’s interventions, unlike interventions by a trial judge, were not evidence of bias.
Cases
ONTARIO - Forum Non Conveniens -The Ontario Court had jurisdiction to hear a contract dispute on the basis that the Ontario Court has jurisdiction simpliciter over the subject-matter of the contract, even though the defendant did not have a substantial connection with Ontario. A BC forum selection clause in a related agreement was not binding on the plaintiff. The defendant failed to prove that Ontario was not the forum conveniens to hear the dispute.
ONTARIO - In a second arbitration between the same parties, the Court rejected the claimant’s request to appoint the same arbitrator on the basis that vocal objection to the appointment of a “repeat arbitrator” should be taken seriously and there was no identifiable advantage for the re-appointment.
ONTARIO - Arbitration Agreement valid despite not specifying a “seat”. Court directs the arbitrator to determine the applicable procedural law for the arbitration.
ONTARIO - Dispute resolution clause in a Share Purchase Agreement was held to be an arbitration agreement not an expert determination even though it does not mention the word arbitration.
ONTARIO - In a claim by a trustee under s.96 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 (“BIA”) to recover the fruits of fraud committed by corporate officers before bankruptcy, the common law doctrine of corporate attribution was inapplicable, and the fruits of the fraud were disgorged from the fraudsters.