SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  1
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
Parties battle over the scope of arbitration clauses: Litigants seek juridical advantages
Igor Ellyn, QC, CS, Ellyn Law LLP, Toronto
This an adaptation of an article published in The Lawyers Weekly, a Canadian legal newspaper on April 3, 2009.
Arbitration agreements should be broadly
interpreted and if a dispute could arguably fall within
the scope of an arbitration clause, the court should refer
the parties to arbitration. At the very least, the court
should permit the arbitrator to determine whether the
claim falls within the scope of the arbitration clause.
Further, Article 8 of the UNCITRAL Model Law in
the International Commercial Arbitrations Act (“ICAA”)
requires the court to refer a matter to arbitration
where an action is brought in a matter which is the
subject of an arbitration agreement. In local
arbitrations, s.7(1) of the Arbitration Act requires a court
to stay the action of a party to an arbitration
agreement except in the limited circumstances in s. 7(2).
In spite of this apparent judicial and legislative
clarity, there is a plethora of litigation over the scope of
arbitration clauses because arbitration clauses tend to
be drafted either to maximize the drafter’s juridical
advantage or as a hard-fought compromise between
parties of equal bargaining power. The cases reviewed
here are just the tip of the iceberg.
In Greenfield Ethanol Inc. v. Suncor Energy
Products Inc., 2007 CanLII 33118, Justice James Spence
applied the oft-cited Court of Appeal decision in
Dalimpex Ltd. v. Janicki 2003 CanLII 34234 to conclude
that an arbitration clause was intended to include all
disputes between the parties. In the Dalimpex case, the
appeal court held that even oppression claims could be
the subject of arbitration unless the language of the
arbitration clause clearly excluded them. To the same
effect is the Court of Appeal’s decision in Woolcock v.
Bushert 2004 CanLII 35081.
In Dancap Productions Inc., v. Key Brand
Entertainment, Inc., 2009 ONCA 135, the Court of
Appeal again applied the deferential approach to
arbitration. The case involved Key Brand’s acquisition
of the Toronto Canon and Panasonic Theatres and their
management by Dancap. A “Term Sheet Agreement”
was silent on arbitration. However, a shareholders’
agreement provided for mandatory arbitration and
exclusive jurisdiction of courts in California. Dancap
sought an injunction to restrain alleged violation of the
Term Sheet. Key Brand sought a stay of the action on
the basis of the arbitration clause in the shareholders
agreement.
Justice Robert Sharpe held that “[w]hile the issue of
whether the dispute between the parties is covered by
the [agreement] is by no means free from doubt . . . it is
at least arguable that the arbitration clause governs
the core issue raised in the action.” Accordingly, the
Court of Appeal directed that the arbitrator should
determine the scope of the arbitration and the Ontario
action was stayed.
When the claims in the action clearly fall outside
the scope of the arbitration clause, the Court will not
grant the stay. In Patel v. Kanbay International Inc.,
2008 ONCA 867, the Court of Appeal refused to stay a
wrongful dismissal and negligent misrepresentation
action under Art. 8 of the ICAA on the basis that the
wrongful dismissal claims are not covered by the ICAA
and the arbitration clause in the shareholders’
agreement was only intended to resolve disputes over
“transactions”. As the action did not deal with
transactions, it was clearly outside the scope of the
arbitration clause.
In Norton v. Peel Financial Holdings Limited, 2007
CanLII 59454, the parties were involved in arbitration
for years and reached an interim settlement which
included an arbitration clause as to implementation of
the settlement. Justice Colin Campbell considered
whether the action should be stayed under section. 7 of
the Arbitration Act. As it was not clear whether the
plaintiff’s claims fell within the arbitration clause, Justice
Campbell adjourned the stay motion pending the
arbitrator’s decision as to whether the new issues fell
within his jurisdiction.
In Pandora Select Partners LP v. Strategy Real
Estate Investments Ltd. [2007] O.J. No. 993, the
plaintiff sought relief from oppression under the Ontario
Business Corporations Act. (“OBCA”) and the defendant
sought a stay under Article 8 of the ICAA. Justice Joan
Lax refused the stay on the basis that “the arbitration
clause would need to have much more explicit
language” to encompass the determination of the
statutory obligations and remedies under the OBCA.
Similar conclusions were reached in Bouchan v.
Slipacoff, 2009 CanLII 728 and in Lansens v. Onbelay
Automotive Coatings Corp., 2006 CanLII 51177, both
involving shareholder disputes in which OBCA remedies
were sought. In both cases, the defendant’s delay in
seeking a stay was a relevant consideration.
In Smith Estate v National Money Mart [2008] OJ
No 4327, the Court of Appeal declined to stay a class
action which claimed improper day loan charges in
favour of a mandatory arbitration clause in the loan
agreement, upholding a decision of Justice Paul Perell.
The decision was the culmination of a three-year
litigation saga. Sections 7 and 8 of the Consumer
Protection Act, 2002, which permit consumers to
participate in a class action even if the contract
contains an arbitration clause, were applicable.
Litigants understandably look for every available
juridical advantage. The forum where the dispute is
determined may significantly impact its outcome.
Therefore, parties to arbitration clauses, particularly
those seeking equitable or statutory remedies, will
continue to institute court actions if there is any
potential advantage. Conversely, defendants will
continue to bring motions to stay in favour of
mandatory arbitration.
Igor Ellyn, QC, CS is the senior partner of ELLYN LAW
LLP Business Litigation & Arbitration Lawyers, Toronto.
He is a Chartered Arbitrator and Certified as a
Specialist in Civil Litigation. Mr. Ellyn is a past president
of the Ontario Bar Association.
© 2009 Igor Ellyn, QC
This article is for information only and is not intended
as legal advice. For legal advice on the matters
discussed in this article, please email the author at
iellyn@ellynlaw.com or online at www.ellynlaw.com.

Contenu connexe

Plus de Igor Ellyn, QC, CS, FCIArb.

Canadian Arbitrator Lacks Jurisdiction to Make Injunction Orders Affecting No...
Canadian Arbitrator Lacks Jurisdiction to Make Injunction Orders Affecting No...Canadian Arbitrator Lacks Jurisdiction to Make Injunction Orders Affecting No...
Canadian Arbitrator Lacks Jurisdiction to Make Injunction Orders Affecting No...Igor Ellyn, QC, CS, FCIArb.
 
Tension between choice of law and mandatory rules in agency and employment ar...
Tension between choice of law and mandatory rules in agency and employment ar...Tension between choice of law and mandatory rules in agency and employment ar...
Tension between choice of law and mandatory rules in agency and employment ar...Igor Ellyn, QC, CS, FCIArb.
 
Developments in the enforcement of foreign judgments in canada
Developments in the enforcement of foreign judgments in canadaDevelopments in the enforcement of foreign judgments in canada
Developments in the enforcement of foreign judgments in canadaIgor Ellyn, QC, CS, FCIArb.
 
Litigating Shareholder Oppression Claims in Onatrio
Litigating Shareholder Oppression Claims in OnatrioLitigating Shareholder Oppression Claims in Onatrio
Litigating Shareholder Oppression Claims in OnatrioIgor Ellyn, QC, CS, FCIArb.
 
The Crossroads of Corporate Law and Family Law - Spouses as Shareholders
The Crossroads of Corporate Law and Family Law - Spouses as ShareholdersThe Crossroads of Corporate Law and Family Law - Spouses as Shareholders
The Crossroads of Corporate Law and Family Law - Spouses as ShareholdersIgor Ellyn, QC, CS, FCIArb.
 

Plus de Igor Ellyn, QC, CS, FCIArb. (7)

Canadian Arbitrator Lacks Jurisdiction to Make Injunction Orders Affecting No...
Canadian Arbitrator Lacks Jurisdiction to Make Injunction Orders Affecting No...Canadian Arbitrator Lacks Jurisdiction to Make Injunction Orders Affecting No...
Canadian Arbitrator Lacks Jurisdiction to Make Injunction Orders Affecting No...
 
Tension between choice of law and mandatory rules in agency and employment ar...
Tension between choice of law and mandatory rules in agency and employment ar...Tension between choice of law and mandatory rules in agency and employment ar...
Tension between choice of law and mandatory rules in agency and employment ar...
 
Developments in the enforcement of foreign judgments in canada
Developments in the enforcement of foreign judgments in canadaDevelopments in the enforcement of foreign judgments in canada
Developments in the enforcement of foreign judgments in canada
 
Litigating Shareholder Oppression Claims in Onatrio
Litigating Shareholder Oppression Claims in OnatrioLitigating Shareholder Oppression Claims in Onatrio
Litigating Shareholder Oppression Claims in Onatrio
 
Financial Experts in Business Litigation
Financial Experts in Business LitigationFinancial Experts in Business Litigation
Financial Experts in Business Litigation
 
The Crossroads of Corporate Law and Family Law - Spouses as Shareholders
The Crossroads of Corporate Law and Family Law - Spouses as ShareholdersThe Crossroads of Corporate Law and Family Law - Spouses as Shareholders
The Crossroads of Corporate Law and Family Law - Spouses as Shareholders
 
Effective Advocacy in Commercial Arbitration
Effective Advocacy in Commercial ArbitrationEffective Advocacy in Commercial Arbitration
Effective Advocacy in Commercial Arbitration
 

Dernier

An introduction to Indian Contract Act, 1872 by Shraddha Pandit
An introduction to Indian Contract Act, 1872 by Shraddha PanditAn introduction to Indian Contract Act, 1872 by Shraddha Pandit
An introduction to Indian Contract Act, 1872 by Shraddha PanditSHRADDHA PANDIT
 
Women and the World of Climate Change- A Conceptual Foundation by Shraddha Pa...
Women and the World of Climate Change- A Conceptual Foundation by Shraddha Pa...Women and the World of Climate Change- A Conceptual Foundation by Shraddha Pa...
Women and the World of Climate Change- A Conceptual Foundation by Shraddha Pa...SHRADDHA PANDIT
 
Classification of Contracts in Business Regulations
Classification of Contracts in Business RegulationsClassification of Contracts in Business Regulations
Classification of Contracts in Business RegulationsSyedaAyeshaTabassum1
 
Patents and AI: Current Tools, Future Solutions
Patents and AI: Current Tools, Future SolutionsPatents and AI: Current Tools, Future Solutions
Patents and AI: Current Tools, Future SolutionsAurora Consulting
 
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD or the EU Supply Chai...
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD or the EU Supply Chai...Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD or the EU Supply Chai...
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD or the EU Supply Chai...Dr. Oliver Massmann
 
xLran: Open source AI for legal hackers.
xLran: Open source AI for legal hackers.xLran: Open source AI for legal hackers.
xLran: Open source AI for legal hackers.mike689707
 
The Ultimate Guide to Drafting Your Separation Agreement with a Template
The Ultimate Guide to Drafting Your Separation Agreement with a TemplateThe Ultimate Guide to Drafting Your Separation Agreement with a Template
The Ultimate Guide to Drafting Your Separation Agreement with a TemplateBTL Law P.C.
 
ArtificiaI Intelligence based Cyber Forensic Tools: Relevancy and Admissibili...
ArtificiaI Intelligence based Cyber Forensic Tools: Relevancy and Admissibili...ArtificiaI Intelligence based Cyber Forensic Tools: Relevancy and Admissibili...
ArtificiaI Intelligence based Cyber Forensic Tools: Relevancy and Admissibili...Anadi Tewari
 
Islamabad High Court Judges wrote a letter to Supreme Judicial Council.pdf
Islamabad High Court Judges wrote a letter to Supreme Judicial Council.pdfIslamabad High Court Judges wrote a letter to Supreme Judicial Council.pdf
Islamabad High Court Judges wrote a letter to Supreme Judicial Council.pdfNo One
 

Dernier (10)

An introduction to Indian Contract Act, 1872 by Shraddha Pandit
An introduction to Indian Contract Act, 1872 by Shraddha PanditAn introduction to Indian Contract Act, 1872 by Shraddha Pandit
An introduction to Indian Contract Act, 1872 by Shraddha Pandit
 
Women and the World of Climate Change- A Conceptual Foundation by Shraddha Pa...
Women and the World of Climate Change- A Conceptual Foundation by Shraddha Pa...Women and the World of Climate Change- A Conceptual Foundation by Shraddha Pa...
Women and the World of Climate Change- A Conceptual Foundation by Shraddha Pa...
 
Classification of Contracts in Business Regulations
Classification of Contracts in Business RegulationsClassification of Contracts in Business Regulations
Classification of Contracts in Business Regulations
 
Patents and AI: Current Tools, Future Solutions
Patents and AI: Current Tools, Future SolutionsPatents and AI: Current Tools, Future Solutions
Patents and AI: Current Tools, Future Solutions
 
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD or the EU Supply Chai...
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD or the EU Supply Chai...Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD or the EU Supply Chai...
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD or the EU Supply Chai...
 
xLran: Open source AI for legal hackers.
xLran: Open source AI for legal hackers.xLran: Open source AI for legal hackers.
xLran: Open source AI for legal hackers.
 
The Ultimate Guide to Drafting Your Separation Agreement with a Template
The Ultimate Guide to Drafting Your Separation Agreement with a TemplateThe Ultimate Guide to Drafting Your Separation Agreement with a Template
The Ultimate Guide to Drafting Your Separation Agreement with a Template
 
Criminalizing Disabilities & False Confessions
Criminalizing Disabilities & False ConfessionsCriminalizing Disabilities & False Confessions
Criminalizing Disabilities & False Confessions
 
ArtificiaI Intelligence based Cyber Forensic Tools: Relevancy and Admissibili...
ArtificiaI Intelligence based Cyber Forensic Tools: Relevancy and Admissibili...ArtificiaI Intelligence based Cyber Forensic Tools: Relevancy and Admissibili...
ArtificiaI Intelligence based Cyber Forensic Tools: Relevancy and Admissibili...
 
Islamabad High Court Judges wrote a letter to Supreme Judicial Council.pdf
Islamabad High Court Judges wrote a letter to Supreme Judicial Council.pdfIslamabad High Court Judges wrote a letter to Supreme Judicial Council.pdf
Islamabad High Court Judges wrote a letter to Supreme Judicial Council.pdf
 

Canadian Litigants Battle Over Scope of Arbitration Clauses Seeking Judicial Advantage

  • 1. Parties battle over the scope of arbitration clauses: Litigants seek juridical advantages Igor Ellyn, QC, CS, Ellyn Law LLP, Toronto This an adaptation of an article published in The Lawyers Weekly, a Canadian legal newspaper on April 3, 2009. Arbitration agreements should be broadly interpreted and if a dispute could arguably fall within the scope of an arbitration clause, the court should refer the parties to arbitration. At the very least, the court should permit the arbitrator to determine whether the claim falls within the scope of the arbitration clause. Further, Article 8 of the UNCITRAL Model Law in the International Commercial Arbitrations Act (“ICAA”) requires the court to refer a matter to arbitration where an action is brought in a matter which is the subject of an arbitration agreement. In local arbitrations, s.7(1) of the Arbitration Act requires a court to stay the action of a party to an arbitration agreement except in the limited circumstances in s. 7(2). In spite of this apparent judicial and legislative clarity, there is a plethora of litigation over the scope of arbitration clauses because arbitration clauses tend to be drafted either to maximize the drafter’s juridical advantage or as a hard-fought compromise between parties of equal bargaining power. The cases reviewed here are just the tip of the iceberg. In Greenfield Ethanol Inc. v. Suncor Energy Products Inc., 2007 CanLII 33118, Justice James Spence applied the oft-cited Court of Appeal decision in Dalimpex Ltd. v. Janicki 2003 CanLII 34234 to conclude that an arbitration clause was intended to include all disputes between the parties. In the Dalimpex case, the appeal court held that even oppression claims could be the subject of arbitration unless the language of the arbitration clause clearly excluded them. To the same effect is the Court of Appeal’s decision in Woolcock v. Bushert 2004 CanLII 35081. In Dancap Productions Inc., v. Key Brand Entertainment, Inc., 2009 ONCA 135, the Court of Appeal again applied the deferential approach to arbitration. The case involved Key Brand’s acquisition of the Toronto Canon and Panasonic Theatres and their management by Dancap. A “Term Sheet Agreement” was silent on arbitration. However, a shareholders’ agreement provided for mandatory arbitration and exclusive jurisdiction of courts in California. Dancap sought an injunction to restrain alleged violation of the Term Sheet. Key Brand sought a stay of the action on the basis of the arbitration clause in the shareholders agreement. Justice Robert Sharpe held that “[w]hile the issue of whether the dispute between the parties is covered by the [agreement] is by no means free from doubt . . . it is at least arguable that the arbitration clause governs the core issue raised in the action.” Accordingly, the Court of Appeal directed that the arbitrator should determine the scope of the arbitration and the Ontario action was stayed. When the claims in the action clearly fall outside the scope of the arbitration clause, the Court will not grant the stay. In Patel v. Kanbay International Inc., 2008 ONCA 867, the Court of Appeal refused to stay a wrongful dismissal and negligent misrepresentation action under Art. 8 of the ICAA on the basis that the wrongful dismissal claims are not covered by the ICAA and the arbitration clause in the shareholders’ agreement was only intended to resolve disputes over “transactions”. As the action did not deal with transactions, it was clearly outside the scope of the arbitration clause. In Norton v. Peel Financial Holdings Limited, 2007 CanLII 59454, the parties were involved in arbitration for years and reached an interim settlement which included an arbitration clause as to implementation of the settlement. Justice Colin Campbell considered whether the action should be stayed under section. 7 of the Arbitration Act. As it was not clear whether the plaintiff’s claims fell within the arbitration clause, Justice Campbell adjourned the stay motion pending the arbitrator’s decision as to whether the new issues fell within his jurisdiction. In Pandora Select Partners LP v. Strategy Real Estate Investments Ltd. [2007] O.J. No. 993, the plaintiff sought relief from oppression under the Ontario Business Corporations Act. (“OBCA”) and the defendant sought a stay under Article 8 of the ICAA. Justice Joan Lax refused the stay on the basis that “the arbitration clause would need to have much more explicit language” to encompass the determination of the statutory obligations and remedies under the OBCA. Similar conclusions were reached in Bouchan v. Slipacoff, 2009 CanLII 728 and in Lansens v. Onbelay Automotive Coatings Corp., 2006 CanLII 51177, both involving shareholder disputes in which OBCA remedies were sought. In both cases, the defendant’s delay in seeking a stay was a relevant consideration. In Smith Estate v National Money Mart [2008] OJ No 4327, the Court of Appeal declined to stay a class action which claimed improper day loan charges in favour of a mandatory arbitration clause in the loan agreement, upholding a decision of Justice Paul Perell. The decision was the culmination of a three-year litigation saga. Sections 7 and 8 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2002, which permit consumers to participate in a class action even if the contract contains an arbitration clause, were applicable. Litigants understandably look for every available juridical advantage. The forum where the dispute is determined may significantly impact its outcome. Therefore, parties to arbitration clauses, particularly those seeking equitable or statutory remedies, will continue to institute court actions if there is any potential advantage. Conversely, defendants will continue to bring motions to stay in favour of mandatory arbitration. Igor Ellyn, QC, CS is the senior partner of ELLYN LAW LLP Business Litigation & Arbitration Lawyers, Toronto. He is a Chartered Arbitrator and Certified as a Specialist in Civil Litigation. Mr. Ellyn is a past president of the Ontario Bar Association. © 2009 Igor Ellyn, QC This article is for information only and is not intended as legal advice. For legal advice on the matters discussed in this article, please email the author at iellyn@ellynlaw.com or online at www.ellynlaw.com.