Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed Tehama Group Inc.’s appeal from the dismissal of its application to set aside an arbitral award under the UNCITRAL Model Law.
The Court of Appeal upheld a stay of Ontario enforcement proceedings against Webuild, holding that liability for the Chilean arbitral award had first to be तयined in Italy.
The court granted interim relief stopping a disputed clause 11 dispute-resolution process while it reserved reasons on a stay application and an injunction application.
CIPPIC's motion to intervene was dismissed because it failed to establish a sufficient nexus between its expertise and the narrow, fact-specific issues on appeal, did not provide a draft factum or authorities to demonstrate a concrete, non-duplicative contribution, and posed a real risk of expanding the scope of the appeal and prejudicing the parties; the stricter onus applicable to intervention in private disputes reinforced denial.
Source excerpt
Federal Court appointed John Judge as sole arbitrator in a dispute under a political risk insurance policy and declined to remove Suncor subsidiaries from the application.
The court appointed a sole arbitrator under the ICAA, holding the arbitrator must be non-Canadian, need not have BC-law expertise, and must meet the parties’ agreed qualifications.
The appeal was dismissed because the Federal Court correctly granted a stay in favour of arbitration: the questions whether GEM is bound by the Licensing Agreement and whether the Agreement was terminated involve complex factual and mixed legal issues that must be referred to the arbitrator under Supreme Court precedent and the Convention, and Gold Line’s prior steps in Federal Court did not amount to waiver of the arbitration right.
Source excerpt
For stays under s.9 ICAA/Model Law art.8 the correct standard for establishing the technical prerequisites including existence of an arbitration agreement is the lower "arguable case" standard; on the record it was arguable an arbitration agreement existed and the motion judge did not err, so the stay was correctly granted and the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed Isagenix’s appeal and upheld the refusal to stay a consumer products-liability negligence claim under the arbitration clauses.
Leave to appeal dismissed because the motion judge correctly exercised the court's supervisory authority under s.243 BIA and the single proceeding model to conclude that SPay was not a stranger: SPay's asserted set-off was sufficiently connected to the receivership (it concerned Mundo's largest account receivable and would affect distributions to creditors), rendering the arbitration clause inoperative in these insolvency proceedings and making it appropriate for the court, not an arbitrator, to determine arbitrability.
Source excerpt
Explore more
