V. Archives

On this page: 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004

Consensual Arbitration in Quebec
By Frédéric Bachand

2010

December 15, 2010

Spaconcept Bromont inc. c. Château Bromont inc.: seized of a motion to issue an interlocutory injunction, the Court repeats that a consensual arbitral tribunal does not have the power to issue injunctions (Superior Court of Quebec, Mireault J., December 2, 2010).

December 13, 2010

Rhéaume c. Société d'investissements l'Excellence inc.: in a major decision in which it is particularly open to considering international and foreign sources, the Court of Appeal clarifies the scope the arbitrators' duty to maintain the secrecy of their deliberations, rules that not all violation of the applicable rules of procedure will vitiate the award, and concludes that there is under Quebec law no inherent duty of confidentiality attaching to the arbitral process (Court of Appeal of Quebec, Beauregard, Hilton and Bich JJ., December 10, 2010)

December 7, 2010

Société du port ferroviaire de Baie-Comeau—Hauterive c. Jean Fournier inc.: the Court of Appeal reiterates that judges have a discretionary power to refuse to give effect to arbitration agreements in a multiparty context (Court of Appeal of Quebec, Thibault, Rochette and Viens JJ., November 26, 2010)

Dorval c. Société en commandite Tour de la pointe enr.: after having found that the arbitration clause did not constitute a "perfect" undertaking to arbitrate, as it does not explicitly provide that the award would be final and binding, the Court nevertheless accepts to enforce it and refers the action to arbitration (Superior Court of Quebec, Bouchard J., September 23, 2010)

November 29, 2010

Aéroports de Montréal c. Groupe Axor inc.: the selection of the arbitration rules of the Canadian Commercial Arbitration Centre entails a waiver of Article 943.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides for the review by a court of a jurisdictional decision made by the arbitral tribunal (Superior Court of Quebec, Masse J., October 22, 2010).

November 18, 2010

Joris Immobilier c. G. Huneault Immobilier inc.: in an exceptionally thorough decision, the Cour homologates an arbitral award after having i) dismissed an argument to the effect that by refusing to postpone the hearing, the arbitral tribunal had breached the audi alteram partem rule and ii) stated inter alia that the hallmarks of arbitration are procedural simplicity, accessibility, swiftness and low costs (Court of Quebec, Gosselin J., October 14, 2010).

Aéroports de Montréal c. Société en commandite Adamax immobilier: on a motion seeking the referral of the case to arbitration, the Court concludes that it is for the arbitral tribunal to rule on its jurisdiction and finds that the exceptions to the negative effect of the competence-competence principle identified by the Supreme Court in Dell Computer Corp. c. Union des consommateurs [.pdf] are not applicable if the arbitration was commenced before the court action (Superior Court of Quebec, Poirier J., September 30, 2010).

Canadian Royalties Inc. c. Nearctic Nickel Mines Inc.: in a very rich and thoroughly reasoned decision, the Court homologates an arbitral award after having i) dismissed an argument to the effect that the arbitral tribunal had breached Article 944.10 of the Code of Civil Procedure by ignoring the provisions of the parties' contract, ii) concluded that the award was sufficiently reasoned, iii) held that than an arbitral tribunal cannot issue injunctions and iv) found that arbitral tribunals may nevertheless issue orders for the specific performance of contractual obligations that do not amount to injunctions (Superior Court of Quebec, Fraiberg J., September 22, 2010).

9101-0983 Québec inc. c. 9051-4076 Québec inc.: the Court grants a motion seeking the referral of an action to arbitration after having concluded that oppression claims are arbitrable, that the arbitration clause at issue was not optional and constituted a "perfect" undertaking to arbitrate, that the arbitral tribunal had the power to rule on its jurisdiction with respect to the claims asserted, and that the autonomy of arbitral tribunals constitutes a fundamental legal principle (Superior Court of Quebec, Nantel J., September 8, 2010).

Forecam Golf Ltd. c. Elliott: on a motion seeking the referral of the action to arbitration, the Court dismisses an argument to the effect that the arbitration clause at issue is not "perfect" and concludes that since an arbitral tribunal does not have the power to issue injunctions, a party does not waive the benefit of an arbitration agreement by asking the Superior Court to issue an injunction (Superior Court of Quebec, Bédard J., September 3, 2010).

St-Jean c. Poirier: the Court grants a motion seeking the appointment of an arbitrator after having dismissed an argument by the respondent to the effect that the arbitration clause at issue was not mandatory (Court of Quebec, Villeneuve J., September 2, 2010).

Ant. Labbé inc. c. General Motors du Canada ltée: the Court refers the dispute to arbitration after having found that the claims fell within the arbitration clause at issue, that it was for the arbitral tribunal to determine whether the plaintiff had validly consented to the arbitration clause, that the fact that the plaintiff had taken various steps in the judicial proceedings did not amount to a waiver of the arbitration clause and that the parties' decision to terminate their contractual relationship had no bearing on the arbitration clause's applicability (Superior Court of Quebec, La Rosa J., September 1, 2010).

Corporation de l'externat St-Jean Berchmans c. Habitations consultants HL inc.: the Court grants a motion seeking the homologation of an arbitral award after having ruled i) that the fact that the arbitrator had--while its decision was under reserve--discussed the case with a lawyer had not vitiated the process, and ii) that the other grounds relied upon by the respondents were inadmissible as they related to the merits of the award (Superior Court of Quebec, Goodwin J., August 2, 2010).

Aliments Breton inc. c. Samson: seized of two motions seeking the referral of an action to arbitration, the Court dismissed one of them after having stated that recourse to arbitration is an exception to the fundamental right to proceed before courts and that the rules allowing it must therefore be interpreted narrowly (Superior Court of Quebec, Dufresne J., July 14, 2010).

Valport Maritime Services Inc. c. Logistec Stevedoring inc.: on a motion seeking the referral to arbitration of an action seeking the dissolution of a general partnership, the Court finds the arbitration clause at issue to be inapplicable to claims of that nature (Superior Court of Quebec, Caron J., July 8, 2010).

Spaconcept Bromont inc. c. Château Bromont inc.: seized of a motion seeking the referral of the dispute to arbitration, the Court finds that an abitral tribunal does not have the power to issue injunctions (Superior Court of Québec, Bellavance J., June 10, 2010).

Doré c. J.L. Freeman, s.e.c.: the Court finds that Article 940.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable to actions relating to small claims (Court of Quebec, Richard J., May 19, 2010).

July 19, 2010

Bombardier Inc. c. Air Liquide Canada Inc. [.pdf] : in an international case in which a local buyer is suing both a local distributor and a foreign manufacturer, the Court rules that an ICC arbitration clause found in the contract concluded between the manufacturer and the distributor is not binding on the buyer (Superior Cour of Quebec, Marcelin J., July 14, 2010).

UJuly 13, 2010

Université de Sherbrooke c. Patenaude: a judgment based on Article 940.4 of the Code of Civil Procedure is an interlocutory judgement for the purposes of a motion seeking leave to appeal (Court of Appeal of Quebec, Hilton J., July 6, 2010).

Location Imafa, s.e.c. c. Fedex Ground Package System Ltd.: the Court holds that it has a discretionary power to refuse to give effect to an arbitration agreement when the action is also directed at co-defendants who are not bound by that agreement; the Court, however, rules that it would be inappropriate to excercise this power in the present case (Superior Court of Quebec, Parent J., June 8, 2010).

Bertrand c. Colabor, s.e.c.: seized of a motion to dismiss a motion seeking the annulment of an arbitral award, the Court rules that, contrary to the petitioner's contention, the challenge to the award was not untimely (Superior Court of Quebec, Moulin J., April 1, 2010).

2945-9609 Québec inc. c. Richard Soucy Rembourrage inc.: the Court refuses to refer the case to arbitration on the ground that the defendant waived the benefit of the aritration agreement by refusing to participate in the arbitration and by taking certain steps in the judicial proceedings (Court of Quebec, Dortélus J., June 29, 2010).

July 8, 2010

Lachapelle Pontiac Buick GMC ltée c. General Motors du Canada ltée: the Court refuses to give effect to a CAMVAP arbitration clause after having concluded, inter alia, that it does not apply to multiparty disputes and that consensual arbitral tribunals do not have the power to grant injunctive relief (Superior Court of Quebec, Auclair J., March 18, 2010).

Lachapelle Pontiac Buick GMC ltée c. General Motors du Canada ltée: the Court rules that the dispute, which arose while the arbitration agreement was operative, did not cease to be within the arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction when the agreement expired (Superior Court of Quebec, Auclair J., March 18, 2010).

July 7, 2010

Investissement Charlevoix inc. c. Gestion Pierre Gingras inc.: an arbitration clause which does not expressly mention the final and binding nature of the award may nevertheless constitute a "perfect" undertaking to arbitrate; disputes concerning the winding-up of companies are inarbitrable, not because they constitute matters of public order within the meaning of Article 2639 of the Civil Code of Quebec, but rather because the jurisdiction conferred on the Superior Court by the Winding-Up Act is exclusive (Court of Appeal of Quebec, Brossard, Rochon and Vézina JJ., June 21, 2010).

Marquis c. Conseil d'arbitrage des comptes des avocats du Barreau du Québec: the arbitration process provided for in the Regulation respecting the conciliation and arbitration procedure for the accounts of advocates is statutory -- rather than consensual -- in nature; therefore, the annulment recourse provided for in Article 947 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not applicable to the decisions rendered by the Council of Arbitration of Accounts of the Quebec Bar, but those decisions remain subject to the Superior Court's superintending and reforming power (Superior Court of Quebec, Hallée J., May 28, 2010).

Nikiforos c. Petropoulos: annulment and homolgation proceedings do not have any determinable value and are thus not suits within the meaning of Article 42 of the Tariff of judicial fees of advocates (Superior Court of Quebec, Mongeon J., June 9, 2010).

Canadian Ground Water Association c. Canadian Geoexchange Coalition: the Court dismisses a motion, based on Article 943.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, challenging a decision whereby the arbitral tribunal dismissed an objection to its jurisdiction (Superior Court of Quebec, Tingley J., June 15, 2010).

Conseillers en gestion et informatique CGI inc. c. Aveos Fleet Performance inc.: while ruling on a motion seeking the appointment of an arbitrator, the Court finds that it is for the arbitral tribunal to determine if the arbitration proceedings are premature, as claimed by the respondent (Superior Court of Quebec, Lebel J., December 10, 2009).

July 6, 2010

Endorecherche inc. c. Université Laval: while reiterating that the courts' intervention during an arbitration ought to be limited, the Court of Appeal's decision suggests that an order of the arbitral tribunal relating to the communication of documents is an award subject to annulment proceedings (Court of Appeal of Quebec, Thibault, Rochette and Gagnon JJ., February 9, 2010).

H.A. Gétry Inc. c. 9065-3627 Québec Inc.: the annulment of a notarial act through improbation is a matter "of public order" within the meaning of Article 2639 of the Civil Code of Quebec and is thus inarbitrable; the homologation of an arbitral award concerns its operative part, not the reasons contained therein (Court of Appeal of Quebec, Chamberland, Forget and Morissette JJ., December 17, 2009).

Pagé c. Kamar: in a multiparty case, the Court of Appeal stays an action directed at a defendant not bound by the arbitration agreement until the conclusion of the arbitration involving the other defendants (Court of Appeal of Quebec, Rochon, Morissette and Côté JJ., September 17, 2009).

Bruneau Électrique Inc. c. Pomerleau Inc.: an arbitration clause which does not mention the final and binding nature of the award is nevertheless "perfect" because the procedural rules to which it refers are explicit on that point; it is for the arbitral tribunal to rule first on an objection to arbitral jurisdiction based on the fact that the contract has not been signed by one of the parties; an arbitration clause is not inoperative just because it has been invoked in the context of incidental warranty proceedings (Superior Court of Quebec, Savard J., March 29, 2010).

Terrawinds Resources Corp. c. ABB inc.: the Court dismisses as inadmissible a motion seeking the annulment of a procedural order made by the arbitral tribunal (Superior Court of Quebec, Devito J., December 15, 2009).

Dubois & Frères ltée c. General Motors du Canada ltée: the Court refers the action to arbitration after having concluded that the arbitral tribunal has the power to render interlocutory injunctions, as the parties' contract so provides; this power is exclusive, the parties having waived the possibility of court intervention based on Article 940.4 of the Code of Civil Procedure; such injunctions may be homologated pursuant to Articles 946ff. of the Code of Civil Procedure (Superior Court of Quebec, Nadeau J., March 9, 2010).

Marcoux c. Intello Technologies inc.: the Court refers the action to arbitration and recalls that it is for the arbitral tribunal to first rule on the scope of the arbitration agreement (Superior Court of Quebec, Lebel J., March 4, 2010).

Allard c. Germain: the Court refuses to refer the action to arbitration on the ground that the plaintiff had not consented to the arbitration agreement invoked by the defendant (Superior Court of Quebec, Beaugé J., May 4, 2010).

Construction Lortie inc. c. Garantie des bâtiments résidentiels neufs de l'Association provinciale des constructeurs d'habitations du Québec inc.: the Court orders that an ongoing arbitration be stayed after having held that an arbitral tribunal is subject to the Superior Court's superintending and reforming power (Superior Court of Quebec, j. Barakett, September 23, 2009).

Villeneuve c. Pelletier: after having held that, faced with an ambiguous arbitration agreement, access to courts ought to be preserved, the Court dismisses a motion seeking the appointment of an arbitrator on the ground that the parties had only concluded an optional arbitration clause (Superior Court of Quebec, Dallaire J., January 27, 2010).

Oiknine c. Rosenberg-Solny: the Court concludes, firstly, that a party that does not challenge the impartiality of an arbitrator during the arbitral proceedings may nevertheless do so while resisting a motion seeking the award's homologation and, secondly, that no reasonable apprehension of bias had been established in this case (Superior Court of Quebec, Beaugé J., October 29, 2009).

Citec Administration inc. c. Corporation du parc d'affaires La Rolland: the Court adopts a minimalist -- and pro-arbitration -- conception of the judicial review of an award's compliance with public order, but nevertheless refuses to homologate a part of the award in which the arbitrator clearly omitted to take into consideration a provision of the contract; the Court also recalls that the arbitral tribunal's mission must not be interpreted restrictively (Superior Court Quebec, Payette J., March 22, 2010).

Distnet inc. c. Andritz Hydro ltée: the Court finds that an arbitration clause inserted in a contract of assignment of claims is not applicable to disputes related to a -- separate -- suretyship agreement; the Court recalls that in certain circumstances, courts may refer to arbitration a person who is not a party to the arbitration agreement but who is related to a party to that agreement; the Court also finds that by presenting a declinatory exception seeking the transfer of the case to a different judicial district, the defendant had implicitly waived the benefit of the arbitration agreement (Superior Court of Quebec, Pronovost J., April 28, 2010).

Microcomm Systems Inc. c. Réseaux Trilliant (Canada) inc.: an amiguous arbitration clause is deemed sufficiently clear to justify the action's referral to arbitration (Court of Quebec, Bousquet J., September 11, 2009).

2009

October 2, 2009

Sonny Black & Divin inc. c. Gauvin: the Court refers the action to arbitration after having ruled that the defendant had not waived the arbitration clause.

September 10, 2009

Heeg c. Hitech Piping (HTP) Ltd.: seized of a motion seeking the referral of the action to arbitration and presented in the context of an oppression claim, the Court refuses to give any effect to the arbitration clause on the ground that it only applies to some aspects of the plaintiffs' claim.

July 31, 2009

Endorecherche inc. c. McNicoll: a procedural order relating to the communication of documents cannot be judicially challenged while the arbitration is ongoing.

July 16, 2009

St-Agapit (Municipalité de) c. Société d'agriculture du comté de Lotbinière: the Court annuls part of an award ordering a party to pay damages relating to that party's abuse of its right to sue, on the ground that the arbitral tribunal did not have jurisdiction to make such an order.

May 4, 2009

Bombardier Transportation c. SMC Pneumatics (UK) Ltd.: the Court reverses a judgment of the Superior Court which granted in part a motion seeking the referral of the action to arbitration, on the grounds that the arbitral tribunal should have been given the opportunity to make a first ruling on the scope of the impugned arbitration agreement.

May 1, 2009

Nikiforos c. Petropoulos: the Court annuls an arbitral award on the ground that the arbitrator breached the rules of natural justice, notably because of a conflict of interest.

April 29, 2009

Johnson v. Kensington Capital Partners Ltd.: the Court refers a shareholders dispute to arbitration and reiterates that the right to arbitrate is a fundamental right.

Construction Lortie inc. c. Garantie des bâtiments résidentiels neufs: an arbitral tribunal constituted pursuant to the Regulation respecting the guarantee plan for new residential buildings is a statutory tribunal that is subject to the Superior Court's superintending and reforming power, and in this case a preliminary decision on jurisdiction is reviewed on a plenary standard.

April 8, 2009

Laboratoires Standa c. Dubois (Succession de): the Court stays the action on the basis of a clause whereby the parties undertook to proceed to a mediation before bringing their dispute to the courts.

April 1, 2009

Plantations Desrochers Inc. c. Aliments Humpty Dumpty Inc.: without mentioning the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Dell Computer Corp. v. Union des consommateurs, the Court grants a motion seeking the referral of the action to arbitration after having ruled on the scope of the arbitration clause invoked by the defendant.

March 19, 2009

Purkinje c. Famic Technologies Inc.: while confirming a decision of the Superior Court dismissing a motion seeking the annulment of an arbitral award, the Court of Appeal renders a decision which is very favourable to the autonomy of the arbitral process and which reiterates that an arbitral tribunal is not subject to the Superior Court's superintending and reforming power, that the scope of arbitration agreements must be interpreted in a liberal manner and that the management of the evidence and the procedure is to be left to the parties and the arbitral tribunal; the Court also relieves the appellant from its default to seek leave to appeal the Superior Court's judgment.

PS Here, LLC c. Fortalis Anstalt: the Court reiterates that an undertaking to arbitrate is an accessory to the claim, which entails that such an undertaking is applicable to the assignee of the claim.

March 6, 2009

Garantie Habitation du Québec inc. (Garantie Habitation) c. Jeanniot: an arbitration taking place pursuant to the Regulation respecting the guarantee plan for new residential buildings is a statutory arbitration, not a consensual arbitration.

March 5, 2009

Ego-Beltwex Underwar, LLC v. Agi Logistica USA, LLC: a foreign arbitral tribunal is a "foreign authority" within the meaning of Art. 3137 of the Civil Code of Quebec.

February 25, 2009

Levasseur c. 9095-9206 Québec inc.: the Court grants a motion seeking the homologation of an arbitral award while recalling that consensual arbitral tribunals are not subject to the Superior Court's superintending and reforming power, and that the Court therefore cannot reexamine the merits of the case.

February 20, 2009

Jutras c. Groupe CGI Inc.: the Court refuse to refer the case to arbitration on the grounds that the oppression claim at issue does not fall within the ambit of the arbitration agreement relied upon.

February 11, 2009

Multi-Assemblage Inc. c. Toufan: the Court dismisses an application seeking the referral of the action to arbitration on the ground that the dispute does not fall within the ambit of the impugned arbitration clause.

February 5, 2009

The Supreme Court of Canada denies leave to appeal from the Court of Appeal of Quebec's decision in Dens Tech – Dens KG c. Netdent-Technologies Inc.

January 15, 2009

Bouillon c. Constructions Cholette: the arbitration process set out in the Regulation respecting the guarantee plan for new residential buildings does not apply when the buyer bases its claim on the general rules of the Civil Code of Quebec.

2008

December 8, 2008

Louis Dreyfus S.A.S. v. Holding Tusculum B.V. and Holding Tusculum B.V. v. Louis Dreyfus S.A.S.: in two decisions showing a willingness to refer to transnational sources, the Court annuls an ICC award on the grounds that the tribunal dealt with a dispute not contemplated by the parties and breached the audi alteram partem rule, while also holding that the res judicata principle does not form part on international public policy.

November 24, 2008

9160-5543 Québec Inc. c. Speedy Corporation: relying on the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Dell Computer Corp. v. Union des consommateurs, the Court grants a motion seeking the referral to arbitration of an action relating inter alia to the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal already seized of the dispute, after having found that the motion raised questions of fact and mixed questions of fact and law.

September 16, 2008

3099-5047 Québec Inc. c. Euro-Pharm International Canada Inc.: the Court grants a motion seeking the appointment of an arbitrator after having found that, contrary to what was asserted by the respondent, there exists a dispute between the parties.

July 24, 2008

Re/Max Platine inc. c. Groupe Sutton-Actuel inc.: the Court of Appeal holds for the first time that Art. 943.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable even when the arbitral tribunal declines jurisdiction.

July 15, 2008

Habitations Sylvain Ménard inc. c. Labelle: an arbitration taking place pursuant to Sec. 106 of the Regulation respecting the guarantee plan for new residential buildings is a statutory arbitration, not a consensual arbitration; Art. 947ff. of the Code of Civil Procedure are thus not applicable.

Fortin c. Rogers Communications Sans-Fil Inc.: in a case concerning the temporal application of Sec. 11.1 of the Consumer Protection Act, the Court grants a motion to refer the claim to arbitration after having held that the dispute had arisen prior to the entry into force of that provision.

July 8, 2008

Société d'investissements l'Excellence inc. c. Rhéaume: in a decision that is fully consistent with the autonomy of the arbitral process, the court homologates an award after having dismissed several objections alleging a series of procedural improprieties, while adding that arbitrators are bound to maintain the confidentiality of their deliberations.

July 4, 2008

9064-1622 Québec inc. c. Société Telus Communications (Telus Mobilité): in a class action case, the Court—mindful of the Supreme Court's decision in Dell Computer Corp. v. Union des consommateurs—refers the action to arbitration to allow the arbitral tribunal to rule on the validity of a no-class action arbitration clause.

June 26, 2008

Dens Tech – Dens KG c. Netdent-Technologies Inc.: in an international commercial arbitration case, the Court of Appeal grants a motion to dismiss a motion seeking a declaratory judgment to the effect that a notice of arbitration was null, and in doing so reiterates that a consensual arbitral tribunal is not subject to superintending and reforming power of the Quebec Superior Court.

June 26, 2008

Dens Tech – Dens KG c. Netdent-Technologies Inc.: in an international commercial arbitration case, the Court of Appeal grants a motion to dismiss a motion seeking a declaratory judgment to the effect that a notice of arbitration was null, and in doing so reiterates that a conventional arbitral tribunal is not subject to superintending and reforming power of the Quebec Superior Court.

May 15, 2008

Habitations Sylvain Ménard inc. c. LeBire: applying Art. 947ff. of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court dismisses a motion seeking the annulment of an arbitral award rendered by a tribunal constituted pursuant to the Regulation respecting the guarantee plan for new residential buildings.

May 13, 2008

Coderre c. Coderre: in a thoroughly reasoned decision in which it shows a willingness to consider the UNCITRAL Model Law in a purely domestic context, the Court of Appeal rules that an amiable compositeur must resolve the dispute in accordance with the provisions on the contract in which the arbitration clause is inserted, unless the parties have explicitly agreed otherwise.

Racine c. Mercedes-Benz Canada Inc.: the Court refuses to annul an award rendered under the aegis of the Canadian Motor Vehicle Arbitration Plan (CAMVAP) and which ordered the buy-back of the vehicle at issue.

May 9, 2008

PMG Technologies inc. c. Novacentre Technologie ltée: an arbitration clause is valid and "complete" even if it does not expressly mention that the award to be rendered will be final and binding.

April 10, 2008

CGI c. Le Guillou: Sec. 11.1 of the Consumer Protection Act does not apply to a legal situation whose facts and effects have occurred prior to the entry into force of that Article.

April 9, 2008

Schwartz, Levitsky, Feldman c. Zafran: a decision ruling on some of the issues in dispute and providing for the resolution of outstanding issues at a later stage of the arbitral proceedings is not an arbitral award and can thus not be subject to a motion to homologate nor can it be subject to a motion to annul.

March 17, 2008

Compagnie d'assurance Standard Life du Canada c. Lavigne: in a decision which reiterates the very limited nature of the review of awards made by courts, the Court of Appeal reverses a decision of the Superior Court that had annulled an award; the Court also holds that the 90-day period mentioned in Art. 947.4 of the Code of Civil Procedure relates to the first presentation of a motion seeking the annulment of an award, not the hearing on the merits thereof.

March 14, 2008

The Settlement of International Investment Disputes Act, a Federal statute which implements the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States, receives Royal Assent.

March 11, 2008

Smart Systems Technologies Inc. c. Domotique Secant Inc.: in an important case in which it expresses a reluctance to consider international and foreign sources while applying the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure which implement the New York Convention, the Court of Appeal refuses to homologate an award rendered in the United States and holds inter alia that: (i) Art. 950 of the C.C.P. refers to public order as understood in international relations; (ii) it would be contrary to such public order to homologate in Quebec an award which—contrary to the parties' intention—is unreasoned; and (iii) a party may object to homologation in Quebec even if it has failed to challenge the legality of the award before the courts of the seat of arbitration.

February 29, 2008

Bérogest Inc. c. 2947 0325 Québec inc.: a motion to dismiss based on Art. 947.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure fails, because although the respondent filed its written contestation more than three months after the award was made, it disclosed to the applicant its grounds of opposition to the homologation of the award well before the expiration of that time limit.

C.F. c. Lapierre: in medical arbitration case, the Court dismisses a motion seeking the annulment of an arbitration award and reiterates that the grounds of annulment set out in the Code of Civil Procedure are limited and must be strictly interpreted, and that arbitral tribunals are not subject to the Superior Court's superintending and reforming power.

January 30, 2008

Monkland 5765 Plus c. 9101-8309 Québec inc.: emphasizing the importance of respecting the autonomy of conventional arbitration, the Court dismisses a motion seeking the annulment of an award and alleging that several mistakes were made by the arbitrator.

January 28, 2008

Baribeau c. Trempe: while dismissing a motion seeking the recusation of an arbitrator based on Art. 942.4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court mentions that arbitrators benefit from a presumption of impartiality and that the applicable test is that of a reasonable apprehension of bias.

January 17, 2008

Storex Industries Corp. c. Byte: in an international commercial arbitration case concerning a conflict between a forum selection clause inserted in an asset purchase agreement and an arbitration clause inserted in an escrow agreement related to the asset purchase agreement, the Court gives precedence to the forum selection clause after having noted that the applicability of the arbitration clause raised a question of law.

January 8, 2008

Packwood c. Cliché, Lortie, Ladouceur Inc.: the tribunal arbitral, not the courts, has jurisdiction over a motion seeking the stay of pending arbitral proceedings.

2007

December 20, 2007

HMI-Promec, s.e.n.c. c. 2924-4095 Québec inc. (Construction Kay-Bek Inn): applying the Dell Computer Corp. v. Union des consommateurs case, the Court refers to the arbitral tribunal the objection to arbitral jurisdiction raised by the defendant.

Boulet c. Demtec Inc.: the Court dismisses as untimely a motion seeking the referral of the action to arbitration.

December 5, 2007

Librati c. Barka Co. Ltd.: a clause providing that a party "may require that the dispute be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the laws of the province of Ontario" is optional and thus not a perfect undertaking to arbitrate within the meaning of the Zodiak International Productions Inc. v. Polish People's Republic case.

November 26, 2007

Airboss of America Corp. c. Gagné: the Court partially annuls an award on the ground that an accountant asked to adjust the price set out in a shares purchase agreement acted ultra petita.

October 31, 2007

Manufacturers Life Insurance Company c. Fontaine Investments: interpreting broadly the arbitrator's mission, the Court partially annuls an arbitral award on the ground that the arbitrator erred when he refused to assert jurisdiction over part of the dispute.

October 12, 2007

9110-9595 Québec Inc. c. Bergeron: the Court finds invalid an arbitration clause inserted in a contract of adhesion and refering to arbitration rules that were not brought to the attention of the adhering party at the time of formation of the contract.

October 10, 2007

Desbiens c. Payne: the Court dismisses a motion seeking the annulment of a decision of the arbitrator ruling on a motion seeking the disqualification of an attorney, while recalling that a consensual arbitral tribunal is not subject to the Superior Court's supervisory jurisdiction and that the judicial control allowed under Art. 946.4 of the Code of Civil Procedure is very limited.

October 7, 2007

Le Guillou c. Filiatrault: Sec. 11.1 of the Consumer Protection Act is applicable to a dispute which arose after its entry into force, including where the dispute relates to a consumer contract concluded before its entry into force.

October 5, 2007

Société immobilière en propriété marine ltée c. Société immobilière Soltron inc.: after having dismissed an argument to the effect held that a clause which does not explicitly exclude the jurisdiction of courts is not a "perfect undertaking to arbitrate," the Court – relying on the Rogers Wireless case – decides that the arbitrator should first rule on an objection to arbitral jurisdiction raising a mixed question of fact and law.

September 25, 2007

Placements GNP Inc. c. Kuen: relying on the Dell and Acier Leroux cases, the Court refers to arbitration a dispute arising out of a shareholders' agreement, while preserving the arbitral tribunal's power to first rule on the effectiveness of the arbitration clause.

August 20, 2007

Thésaurus Inc. c. Xpub Média Inc.: the Court dismisses a sui generis motion partly based on the rule of proportionality (Art. 4.2. of the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure) and requesting that the case be heard by a sole arbitrator, whereas the arbitration clause—which referred to Title 1 of Book VII of the C.C.P.—provided that the tribunal would be comprised of three arbitrators.

August 13, 2007

Josephson c. Twins 2 Investments Inc.: an arbitrator has no jurisdiction to rule on a claim based on Sec. 241 of the Canadian Business Corporations Act, a federal statute, where the arbitration clause provides that the contract in which it is inserted shall be governed by "the laws of the province of Quebec".

July 31, 2007

Dans l'affaire de la proposition de Société en commandite Avestor: in another decision confirming that arbitration clauses may be effective despite the insolvency of a party, the Court—relying on Dans l'affaire de la faillite de : Experts en traitement de l'information (E.T.I.) Montréal Inc. —authorizes a creditor to continue arbitration proceedings against the debtor.

July 20, 2007

SMC Pneumatics (UK) Ltd. c. Bombardier Transportation: in an international commercial case, the Court finds that a claim founded on a transaction which—according to the Plaintiff—resolved a dispute arising out of the main contract does not fall within the ambit of the arbitration clause inserted in the contract.

July 13, 2007

Dell Computer Corp. v. Union des consommateurs: in a fundamental decision in which it reaffirms its support of arbitration, the Court holds that: (i) arbitration is a legal institution without a forum and without a geographic basis; (ii) Art. 940.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure attaches considerable interpretive weight to the Model Law in international arbitration cases; (iii) Art. 3149 of the Civil Code of Quebec has no impact on the effectiveness of the arbitration clause where the legal situation of the parties has no foreign element; (iv) because jurisdictional objections should generally be first dealt with by the arbitral tribunal, a judge seized of a motion seeking to refer an action to arbitration should normally refrain from reviewing the arbitration agreement's effectiveness; (v) absent clear legislation to the contrary, arbitration clauses inserted in consumer contracts should be enforced like other arbitration clauses; (vi) absent clear legislation to the contrary, the right to commence a class action is not a public order right and can thus be waived, even through a pre-dispute arbitration clause; (vii) the arbitration clause set out in terms and conditions found on Dell's website was part of the contract concluded by the consumers, despite that only a hyperlink pointing to those terms and conditions—rather than the full text thereof—was brought to the consumers' attention whey they placed their orders; and (viii) Sec. 11.1 of the Consumer Protection Act, which prohibits any stipulation obliging a consumer to refer a dispute to arbitration, does not apply retroactively and therefore has no impact on the case.

Rogers Wireless Inc. v. Muroff: in this companion case to Dell Computer Corp. v. Union des consommateurs, the Court refers the claim to arbitration and holds that the arbitral tribunal is to make the first ruling on the enforceability of Roger Wireless Inc.'s arbitration clause.

June 29, 2007

Aetios Productions inc./Virginie 1 inc. c. Tousignant: An arbitral tribunal constituted pursuant to Sec. 35.1 of the An Act Respecting Professional status and conditions of engagement of performing, recording and film artists, R.S.Q., c. S-32.1, is a statutory tribunal whose awards can be reviewed pursuant to Art. 847ff. of the Code of Civil Procedure.

June 22, 2007

Purkinje Inc. c. Simard: the Court dismisses a motion seeking the annulment of an arbitral award in which the petitioner argued (i) that the procedure of the Canadian Commercial Arbitration Centre is contrary to public policy and (ii) that the arbitral tribunal had acted ultra petita, disregarded the audi alteram partem rule and rendered a patently unreasonable award; the Court also dismissed a motion relating to a second, ongoing, arbitral procedure and in which the petitioner argued that the arbitral tribunal seized of the second claim would not be in a position to resolve it in an impartial manner.

June 21, 2007

Nikiforos c. Petropoulos: in a decision favourable to the autonomy of the arbitral process, the Court, seized of a motion seeking the recusation of the arbitrator, refuses to stay an ongoing arbitral procedure.

May 2, 2007

Solectron Global Services Canada Inc. c. Techno-Spec Industries Inc.: a dispute arising out of a promissory note does not fall within the ambit of an arbitration clause inserted in a separate contract to which the promissory note relates.

April 30, 2007

Collines de l'Outaouais (MRC des) c. Cascades Inc., Division récupération: the Court grants a motion to appoint an arbitrator after concluding that a clause which does not explicitly exclude the jurisdiction of courts is nevertheless a "perfect undertaking to arbitrate".

April 4, 2007

Ekinciler Demir Ve Celik San, a.s. c. Bank of New York: the Court has no jurisdiction to grant a provisional interlocutory injunction, because the dispute falls within the ambit of an agreement providing for an arbitration taking place in Zurich.

20 mars 2007

Cogismac International Inc. c. Lafontaine: relying on the Court of Appeal's decisions in Dominion Bridge Corp. c. Knai, Concordia Project Management Ltd. c. Décarel Inc. and Société de cogénération de St-Félicien, société en commandite/St-Felicien Cogeneration Limited Partnership c. Industries Falmec Inc., the Court concludes (i) that a party does not necessarily waive the benefit of an arbitration clause by commencing a lawsuit before a court and (ii) that courts can—for reasons of convenience or efficiency—refer to arbitration persons who are not parties to the arbitration clause.

March 5, 2007

Morneau c. Balian: a judge of the Court of Appeal denies leave to appeal the decision of the Superior Court in Balian c. Morneau and suggests that the latter was right to interpret broadly the powers given to judges by Art. 947.3 of the C.C.P.

January 27, 2007

Campbell c. Ferme Réal et Marcel Ryan Enr.: after having characterized as an arbitration award a decision on the value of a partnership, the Court grants a motion seeking the homologation of that award and invokes, inter alia, the fact that the respondents did not seek the annulment of the award within the three-month deadline provided set out in Art. 947.4 of the C.C.P.

January 24, 2007

Nikiforos c. Petropoulos: the Court grants a motion seeking the appointment of a sole arbitrator after having stated that it could intervene once it had been established that an arbitration agreement exists, a dispute has arisen between the parties and more than thirty days have passed since the commencement of the appointment procedure.

January 19, 2007

Appellant's additional submissions on the impact of Bill 48 and Respondents' additional submissions on the impact of Bill 48 filed in the Dell case.

2006

December 21, 2006

The Supreme Court of Canada asks the parties in Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs and Rogers Wireless Inc. v. Muroff to file, no later than January 19, 2007, additional submissions on the impact of Bill 48 on these cases.

December 20, 2006

I-D Foods Corporation v. Hain-Celestial Group Inc.: the Court has no jurisdiction to rule on objections raised during an examination on discovery that was held prior to the referral of the action to arbitration.

December 19, 2006

The federal government announces that Canada has signed the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (press release).

December 14, 2006

The National Assembly of Quebec adopts Bill 48, which prohibits clauses seeking to force consumers to resort to arbitration. Sec. 11.1 of the Consumer Protection Act reads as follows: "Any stipulation that obliges the consumer to refer a dispute to arbitration, that restricts the consumer's right to go before a court, in particular by prohibiting the consumer from bringing a class action, or that deprives the consumer of the right to be a member of a group bringing a class action is prohibited. If a dispute arises after a contract has been entered into, the consumer may then agree to refer the dispute to arbitration."

December 13 and 14, 2006

The Supreme Court of Canada hears the Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs and Rogers Wireless Inc. v. Muroff cases.

December 4, 2006

Bennett Fleet (Québec) Inc. c. Acolam Inc.: seized of a motion seeking leave to appeal from a decision of the Superior Court dismissing a motion to refer to arbitration, a judge of the Court of Appeal recalls that courts can issue provisional or conservatory measures in relation to a dispute that falls within the ambit of an arbitration agreement and cites with approbation the decision of the Court of Appeal in La Coopérative forestière Laterrière c. Les Placements Raoul Grenier Inc., [2003] J.Q. No. 16632, which suggests that arbitral tribunals cannot issue injunctions.

November 30, 2006

Balian c. Morneau: after having concluded that the arbitral tribunal had breached the audi alteram partem rule by calculating damages using a mathematical formula that differed from those relied on by the parties, the Court refuses to annul the award and—invoking Art. 947.3 of the C.C.P.—asks the arbitrators to reexamine the issue of damages after having given the parties another opportunity to be heard.

November 27, 2006

Syndicat canadien des communications, de l'énergie et du papier (SCEP), section locale 145 c. Gazette (The), une division de Southam Inc.: a judgment ruling on a motion seeking the annulment of an arbitral award that dismissed the claim is a "final judgment" within the meaning of Art. 26 of the Code of Civil Procedure, not a "judgment in matters concerning execution"; it can thus be appealed without leave if the value of the object of the dispute submitted to the arbitral tribunal was at least $50,000.

November 23, 2006

Achilles (USA) c. Plastics Dura Plastics (1977) Ltée/Ltd.: seized of a motion seeking to refer to arbitration an action relating to an international commercial dispute, the Court of Appeal finds that there is no reason to apply to an arbitration clause found in the general terms and conditions of a distance sales contract more stringent rules with respect to knowledge and ratification than those applicable to other contractual terms; consent to arbitration is not subject to special or distinctive formal requirements.

November 10, 2006

The Quebec government proposes to add the following provision to the Consumer Protection Act: "11.1. Any stipulation that obliges the consumer to refer a dispute to arbitration, that restricts the consumer's right to go before a court, in particular by prohibiting the consumer from bringing a class action, or that deprives the consumer of the right to be a member of a group bringing a class action is prohibited. If a dispute arises after a contract has been entered into, the consumer may then agree to refer the dispute to arbitration."

October 6, 2006

Dans l'affaire de la faillite de : Experts en traitement de l'information (E.T.I.) Montréal Inc.: discontinuance of the appeal before the Supreme Court of Canada.

October 2, 2006

Unicom Gestion unifiée des communications inc. c. Cliche: the Court dismisses a motion seeking the annulment of an arbitral award after having recalled that courts can only intervene in very limited circumstances.

September 27, 2006

Paris c. MacRae: seized of a motion seeking the annulment of a decision of the arbitral tribunal dismissing a motion to disqualify counsel, the Superior Court concludes that some procedural orders made by an arbitral tribunal may be subject to annulment or homologation proceedings.

September 25, 2006

Appellant's reply factum in Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs

September 15, 2006

LCIA's factum in Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs; Factum filed by the CIPPIC in Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs; Factum filed by the ADR Institute of Canada in Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs; Factum filed by ADR Chamber Inc. in Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs

September 12, 2006

Poupart c. Société Nationale Compagnie d'assurance: confirming the referral of an action to arbitration, the Court concludes that by taking part in the arbitration, the plaintiff had waived the right to invoke the nullity of the arbitration clause on the grounds that it was an external clause (Art. 1435 of the Civil Code of Quebec) and/or an abusive clause (Art. 1437 of the Civil Code of Quebec).

September 7, 2006

Gestion Christian Veilleux c. Chabot: the Court concludes that the time limit relating to the appointment of arbitrators set out in the arbitration clause is not mandatory and grants to the defaulting party 15 days to appoint an arbitrator.

August 10, 2006

The Supreme Court of Canada grants to leave to appeal in Muroff c. Rogers Wireless Inc.

Compagnie des chemins de fer nationaux du Canada c. Agence métropolitaine de transport: after having dismissed the plaintiff's argument to the effect that the arbitration clause was unenforceable because the main contract was not in force, the Courts grants a motion seeking the referral of the action to arbitration while recalling (i) the importance of not affording too much weight to decisions rendered prior to the 1986 reform, (ii) the principle of separability of arbitration clauses and (iii) the arbitral tribunal's power to rule on its own jurisdiction.

August 9, 2006

3879607 Canada Inc. c. Hôtel Cadim (Godin) Inc.: in a complex multi-party case, the Superior Court partially annuls the decision of an arbitrator ruling on his jurisdiction.

August 7, 2006

Airboss of America Corp. c. Fonds de solidarité des travailleurs du Québec (FSTQ): recalling its limited role when asked to annul an arbitral award, the Court refuses to annul an award on the ground that an accountant asked to adjust the price set out in a shares purchase agreement acted ultra petita.

July 24, 2006

Respondent's factum in Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs (Supreme Court of Canada)

July 6, 2006

La Fraternité des policiers et policières de la Sûreté régionale des Riverains Inc. c. Lussier: after having analyzed a characterization problem and concluded that the decision attacked was indeed an award rendered by a consensual arbitration tribunal, the Superior Court dismisses a motion to annul (Art. 947 of the Code of Civil Procedure) while repeating that the powers of a court seized of such a motion are very limited.

July 6, 2006

I-D Foods Corporation c. Hain-Celestial Group Inc.: relying on Art. 941.2 of the Code of Civil Procedure and on the fact that the contract provides that the arbitration is to be governed by that same Code, the Superior Court orders that the arbitrators who will resolve this international commercial case involving a Quebec company and an American company be from Quebec.

June 20, 2006

Gingras c. Entreprises FGC Inc.: while denying leave to appeal from a decision of the Superior Court dismissing a motion seeking the judicial review of an arbitral award, the Court states that the patently unreasonable application of law or precedents by the tribunal is not a ground upon which an award can be annulled.

June 8, 2006

Mega Bloks Inc. c. American Home Assurance Co.: a clause providing for arbitration taking place in a foreign jurisdiction prevails over Article 3150 of the C.C.Q., which grants to Québec authorities jurisdiction over certain actions commenced by insured against their insurer.

May 26, 2006

Holding Tusculum B.V. v. S.A. Louis Dreyfus & Cie: in the context of an application seeking the annulment of an international award, the Court rules that expert evidence purporting to opine on international arbitration laws and customs was admissible.

May 19, 2006

Termaco Ltée c. Novacentre Technologie Ltée: the Court grants a motion seeking the referral of an action to arbitration after having dismissed an argument to the effect that the defendant had implicitly waived the right to arbitration.

May 18, 2006

The Supreme Court of Canada grants to leave to appeal in Dans l'affaire de la faillite de : Experts en traitement de l'information (E.T.I.) Montréal Inc.

May 12, 2006

Appellant's factum in Dell Computer Corporation v. Union des consommateurs (Supreme Court of Canada)

May 10, 2006

Lavigne c. Standard Life, Compagnie d'assurance: in a medical arbitration case, the Court annuls an award on the grounds that the arbitrator failed to properly analyze the evidence, failed to comply with the rules of natural justice and failed to provide sufficient reasons.

March 16, 2007

Les Viandes du Breton Inc. c. Ville de Notre-Dame-du-Lac: a judgment on a motion seeking the homologation of an arbitral award can only be appealed with leave of a judge of the Court of Appeal.

February 16, 2007

Transport Michel Vaillancourt inc. c. Cormier: the prescription applicable to a motion seeking the homologation of an arbitral award is ten years.

January 31, 2006

Muroff c. Rogers Wireless Inc.: citing Dell Computer Corporation c. Union des consommateurs, the Court decides that the bindindgness of an arbitration clause invoked against a motion seeking leave to proceed by way of a class action is to be decided by the judge seized of that motion.

January 20, 2006

Ville de Notre-Dame-du-Lac c. Les Viandes Dubreton Inc.: the Court dismisses a motion seeking the annulment of an award on the ground that it has no power to review the merits of the tribunal's decision.

January 19, 2006

Caouette c. Promutuel Bagot, Société mutuelle d'assurances générales: an award made by a consensual arbitral tribunal cannot be reviewed pursuant to Art. 33 and 846 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The Supreme Court of Canada grants to leave to appeal in the Dell Computer Corporation c. Union des consommateurs case.

2005

December 13, 2005

Dans l'affaire de la faillite de : Experts en traitement de l'information (E.T.I.) Montréal Inc.: Sec. 183(1.1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the principle tending to confer to a single forum an exclusive jurisdiction to deal with all matters connected to a bankruptcy do not affect the bindingness of an arbitration clause inserted in a contract concluded by the trustee to the bankruptcy.

November 24, 2005

Coderre c. Michaud: the Court annuls an an award rendered by an arbitrator sitting as amiable compositeur on the ground that it failed to comply with the terms of the contract.

November 24, 2005

G.H. Communications Inc. c. Bell Canada: as it does not fall within the ambit of Arts. 151.1 and 159 of the Code of Civil procedure, a motion seeking the referal of an action to arbitration can be made at any time during the proceedings.

October 5, 2005

Domotique Secant Inc. c. Smart Systems Technologies Inc.: the Court rules that a Quebec court does not have the power to annul a foreign award, but refuses to homologate the award on the ground that it was not reasoned.

July 22, 2005

GreCon Dimter Inc. v. J.R. Normand Inc.: the Court reverses the Guns N' Roses case and confirms the bindingness of international arbitration agreements invoked in the context of incidental warranty proceedings; the court also states that Quebec arbitration law "must necessarily be harmonized" with the New York Convention and the interpretation given thereto by courts of other jurisdictions.

July 15, 2005

Sonox Sia v. Albury Grain Sales Inc.: the Court gives effect to an ICC arbitration clause invoked in response to an action alleging the ab initio invalidity of the main contract, and affirms that the arbitral tribunal ought to be given the opportunity to rule first on its own jurisdiction.

June 28, 2005

La Garantie des bâtiments résidentiels neufs de l'APCHQ Inc. c. Centre canadien d'arbitrage commercial: (application for leave to appeal dismissed by the Court of Appeal on August 19, 2005) the Canadian Commercial Arbitration Centre lacks standing to argue that a party cannot petition a Court -- while the arbitral proceeding is ongoing -- to seek the annulment of a procedural decision made by the Centre and relating to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal.

May 30, 2005

Dell Computer Corporation c. Union des consommateursan arbitration clause which is not explicitly brought to the attention of a person as he or she is entering, through the internet, into a consumer contract or a contract of adhesion cannot be invoked against that person; disputes concerning consumer law are arbitrable.

May 30, 2005

Exploitation Jaffa Inc. c. Matane Sanitaire Inc.: the Court refuses to give effect to an arbitration clause on the ground that the defendant failed to invoke it promptly.

May 26, 2005

The Quebec National Assembly adopts a motion opposing so-called islamic tribunals. Also available are transcripts of the discussions that led to the adoption of that motion. It comes a few months after the release of the Boyd Report in Ontario.

April 29 and May 25, 2005

Morin c. Bélanger: a judge of the Superior Court who acts as a mediator cannot be compelled to testify in subsequent judicial proceedings relating to the mediation process.

April 25, 2005

Société de cogénération de St-Félicien, société en commandite/St-Felicien Cogeneration Limited Partnership c. Industries Falmec Inc.the Court gives effect to an arbitration clause invoked against an incidental action in warranty but reiterates that judges have a discretionary power to refuse to give effect to -- or to extend the scope of -- arbitration agreements in a multiparty context.

April 22, 2005

Les Habitations d'Angoulème Inc. c. Létourneau: dismissing a motion seeking the annulment of an award, the Court finds that a jurisdictional objection dealt with during the course of the arbitral proceeding cannot be raised again in the context of annulment proceedings, that the petitioner's argument relating to the arbitrator's independence and impartiality must fail because it was not promptly asserted, and that the award is not contrary to public policy.

April 19, 2005

Notice of withdrawal of appeal filed in the Compagnie d'assurance Standard Life c. Fagan case.

March 11, 2005

Gestion Maraleaud Inc. c. Microtec Sécuri-T Inc.: applying the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Desputeaux v. Éditions Chouette (1987) Inc. and the Quebec Court of Appeal decision in The Gazette c. Blondin, the Court dismisses a motion seeking the annulment of an award and reiterates that courts cannot review the merits of arbitral awards.

March 10, 2005

Ouellet c. Compagnie mutuelle d'assurances Wawanesa: the Court grants a motion relating to the appointment of an arbitrator after having found that the arbitration clause invoked by the claimant constitutes a "complete" undertaking to arbitrate within the meaning of the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Zodiak.

March 9, 2005

Bentley Leathers Inc. c. Remo Imports Ltd.: applying the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Desputeaux v. Éditions Chouette (1987) Inc., the Court dismisses a motion seeking the annulment of an award on various jurisdictional and procedural grounds.

March 1st, 2005

Airboos of America Corporation c. Famcorp Inc.: the Court refuses to refer the action to arbitration on the ground that the arbitration clause invoked by the defendants is not applicable to the dispute.

31 janvier 2005

Aspencer1.com Inc. c. Paysystems Corporation: the Court refuses to give effect to an arbitration clause found in an electronic contract on the ground that it had been added after the formation of the initial contract and without the adhering party's consent.

2004

November 18, 2004

The Supreme Court of Canada grants leave to appeal in the Compagnie d'assurance Standard Life c. Fagan case.

October 15, 2004

Grand Toys International Inc. c. Zuckermanapplying the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in Zodiak, the Court of Appeal finds that the undertaking to arbitrate invoked by the defendant is "complete" and refers the action to arbitration.

September 13, 2004

Imprimerie régionale ARL Ltée c. Ghanotakis: a party who did not seek the judicial review (Art. 943 of the C.C.P.) of an interlocutory decision of an arbitrator dismissing an objection to jurisdiction may not later raise -- in proceedings seeking the annulment of the award -- the same jurisdictional objection.

September 10, 2004

Giro Limited c. Frenette: the Court refuses to give effect to an AAA arbitration clause contained in a international commercial contract primarily on the ground that the clause was not applicable to the dispute, but also because it found that the clause was not a complete undertaking as defined by the Supreme Court of Canada in Zodiak.

September 7, 2004

Société Asbestos Limitée c. Lacroix: invoking, among others, the Guns N' Roses and Décarel decisions, the Court affirms that a person who is not a party to an arbitration agreement may nevertheless be under a duty to arbitrate; however, the Court concludes that there were no valid reasons, in the case at bar, to hold that an arbitration agreement to which only the trade union is a party should apply to an employee.

August 18, 2004

9095-5378 Québec Inc. c. Perform Environnement Inc.: denial of a motion to review a decision of an arbitral tribunal having dismissed an objection to its jurisdiction (Art. 943.1 of the C.C.P.); the applicable standard of review in Art. 943.1 applications is correctness; a dispute relating to the validity of a non-competition clause contained in a shareholders agreement is arbitrable; the arbitration agreement has to be interpreted in a broad and liberal manner.

July 9, 2004

Construction Dinamo Inc. c. Congébec Inc.: denial of a motion to review the decision of an arbitral tribunal declaring it has jurisdiction (Art. 943.1 of the C.C.P.).

June 11, 2004

Carboni c. Financière Banque nationale: arbitration arising out of an agreement between the Investment Dealers Association of Canada (IDAC) and the Canadian Commercial Arbitration Centre; disputes relating to the Securities Act are arbitrable; action relating to a dispute previously decided by an arbitrator dismissed by way of preliminary motion.

June 1st, 2004

Robitaille c. Robitaille: an arbitration agreement has to be interpreted in a broad and liberal manner; motion to refer to arbitration granted.

April 30, 2004

Compagnie d'assurance Standard Life c. Fagan: in order to ensure the final character of arbitral awards, the three-month period within which an application to set aside the award may be made is mandatory.

March 12, 2004

Dans l'affaire de la faillite de : Experts en traitement de l'information (E.T.I.) Montréal Inc.: in principle, an arbitration agreement cannot oust the jurisdiction of the Superior Court in bankruptcy matters.

March 11, 2004

Acier Leroux c. Tremblay: a claim in case of abuse based on Sec. 241 of the Canada Business Corporations Act is arbitrable.

January 16, 2004

Union des consommateurs c. Dell Computer Corporation: relying on the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Dominion Bridge Corp. c. Knai, the Court finds that an undertaking to arbitrate contained in a consumer contract cannot be enforced against the consumer unless the seat of arbitration is in Quebec.

© Frédéric Bachand

Back to top