Canada: Choosing A Dispute Resolution Mechanism

Business people and corporate counsel often seem not to pay much attention to their choice of dispute resolution mechanism when negotiating a contract. They often seem treat dispute resolution as just part of the contractual "boilerplate". If they give much thought to it at all, they probably plug in a choice of litigation jurisdiction or arbitration provision from a previous contract. More likely, they don't consider the issue at all. So the contract ends up saying nothing about dispute resolution. That leads to any disputes which arise under it being resolved by litigation. As we'll see, that's likely the worst possible alternative. This article reviews the basic characteristics of the most common dispute resolution mechanisms, so that business people and corporate counsel can make better informed choices on this issue.

It is helpful to consider negotiation, mediation, arbitration and litigation as lying along a continuum. The "negotiation" end of the continuum is characterized by values like acceptable results, flexibility and efficiency; the "litigation" end by values like risk of unacceptable results, expense and delay, and publicity. Looked at that way, it's not hard to see which end of the continuum most businesses would prefer be on.


Let's start with negotiation. There is no mystery about what negotiation is: the parties compromise toward an agreed resolution of their dispute.

Negotiation has several advantages over other dispute resolution mechanisms. By definition, it produces an acceptable result. If both parties don't agree, there's no resolution.

Negotiation is infinitely flexible – it can accommodate anything the parties can dream up and agree on. In particular, it can accommodate solutions based on the parties' ongoing business interests, rather than just their strict legal rights and obligations.

While negotiation can certainly be complex, and therefore expensive and time consuming, it is usually more cost and time efficient than the alternatives.

Negotiations, and their results, are generally confidential. That can be important in sensitive business contexts.

For all those reasons, negotiation is almost always the best dispute resolution mechanism. There are good reasons most disputes are resolved by negotiated settlements. Businesses should always try to negotiate the resolution of a dispute (whatever their contracts say). They should never close the door on negotiation.

Not that negotiation is the perfect mechanism. Again, by definition, it requires compromise. So it's highly unlikely either party will get everything they want.

It also involves significant uncertainty. Because both parties must agree on a solution, both have a veto over that solution. There's always the possibility the other side will "just say no" to any reasonable resolution. (To answer one client's question: No, the court won't order a party to agree to a resolution.) In that case, negotiation just won't work. What then?


Mediation is "just" negotiation facilitated b y an agreed neutral, normally a trained and experienced mediator.

Ideally, if the parties are rational and competently advised, they should be able to negotiate a resolution of their own. But, sometimes that's just not the case. Other times, something about the situation produces a negotiating impasse. In those situations, mediation can be a very useful tool to achieve a negotiated resolution.

Mediation has essentially the same advantages (acceptability, flexibility, efficiency, confidentiality) and disadvantages (necessity to compromise, uncertainty) as negotiation. The differences are of degree rather than kind.

Most importantly, there is undoubtedly some kind of "magic" about mediation. It's hard to explain, and the reasons for it may be different in every case, but there is no doubt that the vast majority of commercial disputes which are mediated are resolved through that process. There is just something about involving a neutral in the negotiation that greatly facilitates resolution. So, mediation is more certain to produce an acceptable result than negotiation.

One problem with mediation is that, not only must the parties agree on a resolution, they must also agree to mediate in the first place, and then on a mediator. Sometimes they can't, or just won't.

A practical downside of mediation, compared to negotiation, is that competent, experienced mediators are not cheap, nor readily available. So mediation can be less cost and time efficient than negotiation. But, if it achieves an acceptable result, that cost and time may be well worth it.


With arbitration we move to a fundamentally different kind of dispute resolution mechanism. (This is why the mediation-arbitration hybrids can be so tricky.) In arbitration the parties agree to give a neutral the power, not to facilitate an agreed resolution of their dispute, as in mediation, but to impose a legally binding resolution on them, whether they agree with it or not.

Arbitration is essentially "private litigation." But, in the hands of experienced counsel, it can have important advantages over litigation.

Arbitration is usually based on the parties' legal rights and obligations, not their business interests. Contrary to popular belief, an arbitrator does not (or at least should not) just "cut the baby in half". They find the facts based on the evidence. They apply the relevant law to those facts. They then determine the parties' legal rights and obligations and resolve the dispute as the law requires, based on those facts. That process presents the opportunity for a party to win the dispute – to "hit a home run." Of course, that necessarily also presents the risk of losing – of being the pitcher who gives up that home run.

Arbitration has significant potential advantages. The parties have (at least) input into the choice of their decision maker. That can give comfort that the result will be at least acceptable, if not necessarily ideal.

Arbitration has tremendous procedural flexibility. Experienced counsel can tailor its procedures to focus on exactly what is needed to resolve the particular dispute. That can lead to significant cost and time efficiency compared with litigation. See the following article by Sarah McEachern and Hunter Parsons for more on this issue.

Arbitration provides certainty. It is virtually certain that the arbitrator will resolve the dispute.

It provides finality. It is very hard to appeal an arbitral award, and relatively easy to enforce one around the world.

Like negotiation and mediation, arbitration is generally confidential.

However, the fundamental nature of arbitration involves one big potential disadvantage: the possibility that the decision imposed on the parties by the arbitrator is unacceptable to one (or both!) of them. There's no avoiding that. It's inherent in the nature of arbitration (and litigation), as opposed to negotiation or mediation.

In addition, while arbitration procedures are very flexible, and promote efficiency, they are much closer to those of litigation than those of negotiation or mediation. Cost and time efficiency therefore suffer by comparison.


Litigation is fundamentally the same kind of process as arbitration: a neutral has the power to impose a legally binding resolution on the parties. But instead of the parties agreeing on that neutral, they're appointed by the state, in the person of a judge.

It is crucial to understand that litigation, warts and all, is our society's default dispute resolution mechanism. If the parties don't agree on another mechanism, their dispute will be resolved by litigation, in any jurisdiction whose courts are willing to take it on. While litigation has its place, it should be obvious from a consideration of its advantages and disadvantages that it is not usually the best option.

Litigation generally has only one significant advantage: certainty. As with arbitration, the process will almost certainly resolve the parties' dispute. But that's it. There are generally no other advantages to litigation.

On the other hand, there are a host of disadvantages. The parties have essentially no input into their choice of decision maker. Their dispute is resolved by whoever the relevant court's bureaucracy assigns to it. In Canada, where (outside Toronto) there is no specialized roster of experienced commercial judges, that can be a real problem in complex commercial cases.

As with arbitration, there is the possibility of an unacceptable decision being imposed.

Litigation procedures, despite some recent tinkering designed to make them more efficient and user-friendly, are relatively inflexible. The mandatory disclosure of relevant documents to the other parties, which is such an essential part of litigation, can be a real burden in the email age.

Litigation is usually the most expensive and time consuming dispute resolution mechanism.

Compared to arbitration, there is a lack of finality. Either party can appeal a trial decision as of right. Then the parties have to do it all over again (not quite) in an appellate court. Enforcement of a judgment around the world is more difficult than enforcement of an arbitral award.

Absent a sealing order, which the courts are reluctant to grant in commercial cases, the parties' dispute will be played out in public, with all the evidence, arguments and results available to anyone who cares to look (and circulate on the internet), including the media.

All in all, not a pretty picture. One to be avoided if possible.


Negotiation and mediation on the one hand, and arbitration and litigation on the other, are fundamentally different kinds of dispute resolution mechanisms. Each has distinct advantages and disadvantages.

Business people and corporate house counsel should carefully consider the kinds of dispute which are likely to arise under the contracts they negotiate, and chose a dispute resolution mechanism (or combination of mechanisms) which is best suited to resolve those kinds of dispute. If they don't chose wisely, they may end up being committed to a mechanism which is inappropriate for the disputes which do arise. If they don't chose at all, then by default they chose litigation. There is usually a better choice.

About BLG

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Alexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP
Minden Gross LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Alexander Holburn Beaudin + Lang LLP
Minden Gross LLP
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions