ONTARIO – Arbitration – Jurisdiction. The Arbitration Act, 1991 (“Act”) has no application where the court finds that, due to a failure of consideration, there is no contract and thus, no arbitration clause. In those circumstances, s. 7(6) does not apply and does not prohibit an appeal.
Continue readingCase #091E – All Communications Network of Canada v. Planet Energy Corp.
ONTARIO – Arbitration – On an application to set aside an arbitral award pursuant to Art. 34(2)(a)(iii) of the UNCITRAL Model Law of the International Commercial Arbitration Act, 2017 on the ground that a party was denied the right to present its case, the test is whether the arbitrator’s decision offends our most basic notions of morality and justice. ONCA dismissed an appeal from the application judge’s decision upholding the arbitral award despite the Respondent’s late delivery of a few highly relevant documents. The Appellant failed to adduce evidence that the Respondent’s late delivery of documents prevented cross-examinations or responding evidence, or affected its closing argument.
Continue readingCase #090M – Russian Federation v. Luxtona Limited, 2023 ONCA 393 (CanLII)
ONTARIO – Arbitration – Jurisdiction – An application to set aside an arbitral award for lack of jurisdiction is a hearing de novo, not a review or appeal from the decision of the tribunal. However, where a party has participated fully in the arbitration, its failure to raise a piece of evidence before the tribunal may be relevant to the weight the court should assign to that evidence.
Continue readingCase #089E – Grant et al v Seaway Auto Group Inc. et al.
ONTARIO – Arbitration – Application to set aside arbitral award under Arbitration Act, 1991, s. 46(1)6. –Where an arbitration agreement provides that the arbitral award is final without right of appeal even as to questions of law, the ambit of the Court’s right to set aside the award is limited to ensuring that both parties were treated equally and were given a right to present their case and respond. The Court will not review the correctness or reasonableness of the arbitral award.
Continue readingCase #088D – Mattamy (Downsview) Limited v. KSV Restructuring Inc. (Urbancorp)
ONTARIO – Arbitration – Set aside application pursuant to s. 46 of the Arbitration Act, 1991. Arbitrator had jurisdiction to raise the new issue. However, the Arbitrator’s refusal to allow a party to present evidence in respect of the new issue and their exclusion of certain evidence amounted to procedural unfairness that offended the principles of natural justice. An arbitrator does not have inherent jurisdiction.
Continue readingCase #087D – Tianjin Dinghui Hongjun Equity Investment Partnership v Du et al.
ONTARIO – Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Award – Recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award refused pursuant to ICAA (Model Law) where contractual notice and stepped dispute resolution provisions not followed. The Model Law defers to the contractual means of delivery or service when specified and this is not considered a violation of due process.
Continue readingCase #086E – Taseko Mines Limited v. Franco-Nevada Corporation
ONTARIO – Arbitration – Standard of Review – The standard of review on an appeal from an arbitral award on a question of law or a mixed question of fact and law is reasonableness. The reasonableness standard is highly deferential to the arbitrator, but the arbitrator is required to decide disputes in accordance with binding precedent and it must reveal that the decision was not based on an irrational chain of analysis.
Continue readingCase #085E – Baffinland Iron Mines LP v. Tower-EBC G.P./S.E.N.C.
ONTARIO – Arbitration – Arbitration Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 17, ss. 45(1) and (2)– Where an arbitration agreement provides that the arbitration “finally settles” all issues, there is no basis for the Court to grant leave to appeal from the arbitral award, even on questions of law.
Continue readingCase #084M – Van Doorn v. Loopstra Nixon, 2023 ONSC 1782
ONTARIO – Arbitration – Court Appointment of Arbitrator – Where the arbitration agreement provides no procedure for appointing the arbitral tribunal, the court has the jurisdiction under section 10(1)(a) of the Arbitrations Act, 1991 to make the appointment. Where there are several qualified candidates, the court’s task is to select the arbitrator that is best qualified by profession or occupation to decide the issues given the issues in dispute and the factual matrix in which they arose. Relative adjudicative experience is often a decisive factor.
Continue readingCase #083M – Orion Travel Insurance Co. v. CMN Global Inc. 2023 ONSC 1527
ONTARIO – Arbitration – Right to Be Heard – Where the parties were afforded equal opportunities to present their cases, and data relied on by an expert was relied on by both parties in their submissions despite not being marked as an exhibit, the right to be heard was satisfied.
Continue reading