While the contractual interpretation generally constitutes mixed questions of fact and law, the interpretation of a standard-form contract would be considered as a question of law when there is no meaningful factual matrix that is specific to the parties in dispute to assist the interpretation process and the interpretation would have presidential value (para. 24 of Ledcor Construction Ltd. v. Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co., 2016 SCC 37). This article aims to summarize the Quebec Court of Appeal’s decision on a declamatory exception claim based on the ambiguous dispute resolution clauses in a standard-form insurance policy (9369-1426 Québec inc. (Restaurant Bâton Rouge) c. Allianz Global Risks US Insurance Company, 2021 QCCA 1594). Having studied the insurance policy in dispute and numerous Supreme Court of Canada and Quebec Court of Appeal decisions as well as doctrines on arbitration and contractual interpretation, the Quebec Court of Appeal confirms that the trial judge is right to refer the matter to arbitration and that the arbitration clause should be interpreted in a large and liberal manner (para. 13 of the Decision)
Continue reading “Quebec Court of Appeal Confirms that Trial Judge is Right to Refer the Matter to Arbitration Because the Arbitration Clause Intended to Apply in Quebec Prevails and the Contra Proferentem Rule Does Not Apply Here – #64”The Arbitration Proceeding was Suspended with regard to the Non-signatories to the Arbitration Agreement Until Final Judgments on Judicial Review Applications are Rendered – #63
Some readers and friends write to me these days asking if I will continue sharing articles on the case laws. Indeed, in the past few days, although I have been reading court decisions on daily basis for work and leisure, I did not share my summary and analysis of the case laws here.
In the past few days, I moved from my previous apartment in downtown Montreal with serious construction issues (the construction noise sometimes starts at 7 a.m. since May this year) to a cozy condo with beautiful view and kind neighbours in Town of Mount Royal. In the past few days, I managed to facilitate the communications between my clients and the opposing parties in some family files so that they reach consent for the best interests of their children and move forward in their life with peace of mind; In the past few days, I managed to prepare legal proceedings for a Court of Appeal case on private international law, which I received the mandate two days before the deadline (big thanks to the teamwork); I also handled a few pre-trial examinations in French and some negotiations in English for some civil files; Besides, I have appeared in front of the Municipal Court to help the client to get his justice etc.
In November and December, I will participate in the 19th CIETAC CUP as an arbitrator again. And I am taking more trainings on arbitration organized by Barreau du Québec in the coming days. Apparently, thanks to the readers’ comments and support on my website, I would love to continue publishing more summary and analysis of the case laws here so that I could build up connections with experienced lawyers in Quebec and with jurists from different countries and jurisdictions.
This post aims to summarize the analysis of Mr. Justice Lukasz Granosik, j.c.s. on Mullen c. Nakisa inc., 2021 QCCS 4388. It is worth to mention in the very beginning that this legal proceeding is governed by Art. 530 (2) C.C.P. i.e. an application for judicial review of a decision made by an arbitrator during a case management conference on July 30, 2021.
Continue reading “The Arbitration Proceeding was Suspended with regard to the Non-signatories to the Arbitration Agreement Until Final Judgments on Judicial Review Applications are Rendered – #63”Le dossier est renvoyé à l’arbitrage malgré que certaines parties au litige ne soient pas signataires de la Convention – #61
Cet article vise à résumer un jugement récent rendu par l’honorable Madame la Juge Johanne Mainville concernant une demande en exception déclinatoire visant à renvoyer le litige à l’arbitrage en vertu de l’art. 622 C.p.c. Dans l’arrêt Césario c. Régnoux, 2021 QCCS 3009, Madame la juge Mainville note qu’il n’y a pas assez de preuve documentaire pour conclure la compétence de la Cour supérieure sur le litige ou pour déroger au principe général.
Les faits pertinents
Le 9 août 2019, 9226-0454 Québec Inc. (« 9226 ») et la Compagnie Gala Média inc. (« Gala Média ») concluent une Convention entre actionnaires (« Convention ») aux fins d’établir un cadre contractuel gouvernant leurs relations visant à promouvoir les intérêts des opérations de création, de conceptualisation et de développement de concepts audiovisuels et numériques du Projet 2Dads.
Continue reading “Le dossier est renvoyé à l’arbitrage malgré que certaines parties au litige ne soient pas signataires de la Convention – #61”An Olympian’s Doping Offense: Staking an Entire Athletic Career on Being Correct on Disputed Doping Test when the Issue is Complex and Contentious is a Huge and Foolish Gamble! – #60
While I am watching the Tokyo Olympic Games and cheering for the Olympians these days, I have spent some time in reading the 88-page Court of Arbitration for Sport’s (“CAS”) award on Sun Yang’s (”Athlete”) doping offense case rendered on June 22, 2021 (CAS 2019/A/6148 World Anti-Doping Agency v. Mr Sun Yang & Fédération Internationale de Natation (FINA)). The Athlete is sanctioned with a period of ineligibility of 4 years and 3 months, beginning on 28 February 2020 according to the 2021 FINA Doping Control Rules (“FINA DC”) based on the principle of lex mitior. This article summarizes tribunal’s analysis of the following question: Did the Athlete commit an anti-doping rule violation?
Continue reading “An Olympian’s Doping Offense: Staking an Entire Athletic Career on Being Correct on Disputed Doping Test when the Issue is Complex and Contentious is a Huge and Foolish Gamble! – #60”The Arbitration Mechanism Created by the Regulation Aims to Ensure the Expedited Settlement of Disputes Related to Construction Defects Affecting the Newly Built Residential Buildings – #59
The arbitration mechanism created by the Regulation respecting the Guarantee Plan for new residential buildings, CQLR c B-1.1, r 8 (“Regulation”) is an administrative proceeding as it does not allow the parties renounce to it once the dispute arises. In Consortium MR Canada ltée c. Morissette, 2021 QCCS 2847, Mr. Justice Philippe Bélanger conducts the judicial review over the arbitral award from the arbitration proceeding organized according to the Regulation based on the reasonableness standard as indicated in the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court of Canada on Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65. Mr. Justice Bélanger held that the Arbitrator did not commit an unreasonable error in concluding that Consortium MR Canada Ltd. (“MR”) breached its obligation of result to the buyers of the newly-built condominiums/the Beneficiaries of the Guarantee Plan.
Continue reading “The Arbitration Mechanism Created by the Regulation Aims to Ensure the Expedited Settlement of Disputes Related to Construction Defects Affecting the Newly Built Residential Buildings – #59”Au Québec, lorsqu’il s’agit d’apprécier la validité de la sentence arbitrale, le tribunal va rechercher si la sentence elle-même contrevient à des dispositions d’ordre public. – #54
Dans l’arrêt Perreault c. Groupe Jonathan Benoît, 2021 QCCS 1350, l’honorable Peter Kalichman rejette la demande en annulation de la sentence arbitrale et accueille la Demande d’homologation. Cet arrêt nous rappelle que pour annuler une sentence arbitrale ou s’opposer à son homologation au motif qu’elle est contraire aux dispositions d’ordre public, une partie doit faire plus que simplement démontrer que l’arbitre a commis une erreur dans son application des règles d’ordre public. Dans l’arrêt Desputeaux c. Éditions Chouette (1987) inc., 2003 CSC 17, la Cour suprême nous enseigne que la partie doit démontrer que la sentence arbitrale elle-même est incompatible avec l’ordre public.
Continue reading “Au Québec, lorsqu’il s’agit d’apprécier la validité de la sentence arbitrale, le tribunal va rechercher si la sentence elle-même contrevient à des dispositions d’ordre public. – #54”Leave to Appeal Refused When the Arbitral Tribunal Empowered by ICC Arbitration Rules Bars Late-Raised Legal Argument for Procedural Fairness – #53
This post aims to summarize part of the analysis in the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta’s decision on TR Canada Inc v Cahill Industrial Limited, 2021 ABQB 274.
Factual Background
In August 2014, TR Canada Inc. (“TR”) was awarded a contract to be the general contractor responsible for the construction of two gas turbine generators and two heat recovery steam generators, which are connecting to the Fort Hills electrical system.
TR subcontracted the physical work to Cahill Industrial Ltd. (“Cahill”). Cahill was required to perform the “balance of plant works”, which included the electro-mechanical erection works of the project. The terms of the subcontract between TR and Cahill referred the disputes between the parties to arbitration.
A number of disputes arose between TR and Cahill during the project. Those disputes related to coordination and sequencing of the various subcontractors and works, as well as changes and additions to the scope of work.
On December 4, 2018, the pleadings of the arbitration proceeding between TR and Cahill commenced.
Continue reading “Leave to Appeal Refused When the Arbitral Tribunal Empowered by ICC Arbitration Rules Bars Late-Raised Legal Argument for Procedural Fairness – #53”L’affaire Specter Aviation c. Laprade : L’état de jurisprudence justifie la permission d’appeler d’un jugement concernant l’autonomie de la clause d’arbitrage – #51
Cet article vise à résumer un jugement récent rendu par l’honorable Monsieur le Juge Bachand de la Cour d’appel du Québec concernant l’autonomie de la clause d’arbitrage (Specter Aviation c. Laprade, 2021 QCCA 183).
Les faits pertinents
En avril 2012, M. Laprade, World Aircraft Leasing Inc. (ci-après « WAS ») et United Mining Supply (ci-après « UMS ») signent « l’Avenant au protocole d’accord USM Aviation établi en avril 2012 ». M. Laprade et World Aircraft Leasing Inc. (ci-après « WAL ») assoient leur droit de propriété dans l’avion de type Beechcraft Super King Air 300 (ci-après « l’Avion Beechcraft 300 »). L’Avenant contient la clause suivante :
Continue reading “L’affaire Specter Aviation c. Laprade : L’état de jurisprudence justifie la permission d’appeler d’un jugement concernant l’autonomie de la clause d’arbitrage – #51”lululemon v. ICP: The Standard of Reasonableness will Generally Best Serve to Preserve the Autonomy of the Forum Selected by the Parties and to Minimize Judicial Intervention – #48
The yoga practitioners must have heard of lululemon. Indeed, headquartered in Vancouver, British Columbia, lululemon is the high-end yoga-focused chain featuring stylish athletic wear and accessories. It sells its products in retail stores and directly to consumers through their online platforms. Industrial Color Productions Inc. (“ICP”) is a professional media production company located across the USA. ICP provided professional media production services and photography for lululemon’s e-commerce platforms since October 2017. However, in May 2019, lululemon notified ICP that it intended to terminate the Agreement. Their contractual disputes were brought to the arbitral tribunal seated in Vancouver, Canada. In April 2020, the arbitrator rendered his award, requiring lululemon to pay to ICP, inter alia, an amount of US$1,081,967 and applicable interest as the damages for breach of contract. lululemon seeks to set aside this portion of the award before the Supreme Court of British Columbia as it claims that the arbitrator went beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration in making an award that ICP did not plead during the arbitral hearing (lululemon athletica canada inc. v Industrial Color Productions Inc., 2021 BCSC 15).
This court decision reminds us that the standard of reasonableness and not correctness will generally best serve to preserve the autonomy of the forum consensually selected by the parties and to minimize judicial intervention. It points out that although the Ontario courts applied standard of correctness on reviewing question of jurisdiction in The United Mexican States v. Burr, 2020 ONSC 2376 and Mexico v. Cargill, Incorporated, 2011 ONCA 622, a commercial dispute involving two private companies is “foundationally different than” an investment dispute between a state and foreign investors. In addition, Mr. Justice Funt noted that the parties’ expectations as to the completeness of the arbitrator’s reasons should be less than those of the parties engaged in the commercial litigation before the judicial tribunal.
Continue reading “lululemon v. ICP: The Standard of Reasonableness will Generally Best Serve to Preserve the Autonomy of the Forum Selected by the Parties and to Minimize Judicial Intervention – #48”Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award: Maritime Court of China Recognized and Enforced a Singaporean Award which Awarded Interest that the Party Did Not Claim – #47
Factual Background
On 14 September 2014, Emphor FZCO (“Emphor”) signs a shipbuilding contract (“Shipbuilding Contract”) with Guangdong Yuexin Ocean Engineering Co., Ltd. (“Yuexin”) for the purchase of a 60.6 meters anchor handling tug supply vessel. They agree that Yuexin should fulfil its delivery obligations on or before March 3, 2016 and that if Yuexin fails to fulfill its delivery obligations due to the force majeure, Emphor can terminate the contract after an excessively delayed delivery of over 210 calendar days. As a consequence, Yuexin should refund all payment for bookings and pay the interests at an annual rate of 6%.
On December 3, 2013, their Contract comes into effect.
On October 10, 2016, as Yuexin fails to fulfil its delivery obligations, Emphor notifies Yuexin that Emphor is going to terminate the contract. Moreover, Emphor also requests Yuexin to refund US$ 2,780,000 that Emphor has prepaid for the vessel and the interests to Emphor.
Continue reading “Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award: Maritime Court of China Recognized and Enforced a Singaporean Award which Awarded Interest that the Party Did Not Claim – #47”