Canada: No "Piggybacking" To Avoid B2B Arbitration: Supreme Court Of Canada Affirms Enforceability Of Arbitration Clauses Despite Related Class Action

Last Updated: July 12 2019
Article by McMillan LLP

In its recent 5-4 decision in Telus Communications Inc v. Wellman,1 the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that courts must enforce valid arbitration agreements between businesses despite the existence of parallel litigation by other plaintiffs against the same defendant - even where that litigation is a class action raising identical issues.

The decision is an important victory for Canadian businesses that rely on arbitration clauses in either standard form B2B agreements or carefully negotiated commercial contracts between sophisticated parties.  In order to take full advantage of this important decision, Canadian businesses should review their contracts to ensure that their arbitration clauses cover a broad range of claims and can efficiently address the risk of parallel proceedings.

The Dilemma of Arbitration and Third Party Litigation

Should a court enforce a valid arbitration clause between two parties if one of them is involved in related litigation with a third party?  On the one hand, courts usually enforce valid contracts. Doing so for an arbitration clause gives effect to the parties’ choice of an alternative dispute resolution method that offers procedural flexibility, a chance to select an expert decision-maker and other advantages.  On the other hand, enforcing an arbitration clause where there is related litigation may give rise to multiple proceedings and potentially inconsistent results.  Some claims are also too small to arbitrate individually and can only be prosecuted by a class action. While courts respect freedom of contract, they also try to avoid inefficient overlapping proceedings and ensure access to justice.

Prior to Telus, Canadian courts in most common law provinces were often reluctant to allow multiple proceedings or restrict access to class actions.  However, the Telus case should lead lower courts to favour party autonomy and enforce valid arbitration clauses.

The Telus Business and Consumer Contract Claims

The Telus case involved a proposed class action of Ontario residents who entered into per minute billing plans for mobile phones.  The plaintiff alleged that Telus’ terms and conditions made no mention of a practice of “rounding up” calls to the next minute, resulting in overbilling.  He sought to certify a proposed class consisted of about 1,400,000 consumers and 600,000 businesses. 

Although the arbitration clause in Telus’ standard terms and conditions covered the plaintiff’s claims, Ontario’s Consumer Protection Act2 invalidated the clause in agreements with consumers.  As result, at least 70% of the claims would proceed in court under the Class Proceedings Act.3  The issue was whether Ontario’s domestic Arbitration Act4 gave the courts discretion to refuse a stay of the proposed class proceeding for the remaining 30% of Telus’ business customers.  Refusal of the stay of proceedings would effectively invalidate the otherwise binding arbitration clauses in the business agreements.

The plaintiff relied on a long line of cases in which Canadian courts refused to stay court proceedings in favour of arbitration on the basis that only some of the litigants were bound by the arbitration clause and the litigation claims were so closely related to the arbitration claims that it would be unreasonable to separate them.5 Many of these cases were ordinary commercial disputes in which a plaintiff named a non-party to the arbitration agreement as a co-defendant in the litigation.6  In the class action context, plaintiffs seeking to circumvent arbitration clauses would take a different approach.  They tried to piggyback on the related claims of other plaintiffs against the same defendant.  Both strategies would lead to a risk of multiple proceedings and, until the Supreme Court’s Telus decision, Canadian courts tended to look for ways of consolidating the related disputes in a single action.

Discretion to Refuse a Stay Is Limited

The Arbitration Act uses the mandatory language “shall” to direct courts to stay proceedings by parties to an arbitration agreement.7  This mandatory stay is only subject to narrow exceptions such as those relating to capacity or the validity of the arbitration agreement,8 none of which applied to the businesses in the Telus case.

However, section 7(5) of the Arbitration Act includes an additional provision that is also found in the domestic arbitration legislation of other Canadian jurisdictions.  It applies where:

  1. the agreement deals with only some of the matters in respect of which the proceeding was commenced; and
  2. it is reasonable to separate the matters dealt with in the agreement from the other matters.

If these preconditions are satisfied, the court “may stay the proceeding with respect to the matters dealt with in the arbitration agreement and allow it to continue with respect to other matters.”9

The majority of the Supreme Court recognized that section 7(5) of the Arbitration Act does not create an additional category of exceptions to the narrow grounds for refusing a stay of proceedings.  Instead, it expands a court’s power to stay proceedings that are only partly covered by an arbitration clause.  This power to issue a partial stay of proceedings and permit residual litigation that is beyond the scope of an arbitration clause does not allow a court to refuse to stay proceedings that do fall within the scope of the clause.     

The Supreme Court’s minority decision warned that this interpretation of section 7(5) risked limiting access to justice for small claims that could only be pursued by class actions and risked multiple inefficient proceedings for larger claims.  As a result, the minority preferred to interpret the statute as allowing courts to override arbitration in these circumstances.  While the majority recognized these risks, it insisted that they should be addressed by the legislature rather than the courts. 

Lessons for Canadian Businesses

While the Telus case dealt with related proceedings against the same defendant, the court’s reasoning appears to also address cases where a single plaintiff adds non-signatory defendants to its litigation against a party to the arbitration clause.  Although those situations may involve a single “proceeding”, as long as the claim asserted against a signatory defendant falls within the scope of the arbitration clause, it should be stayed by a court.

In light of the Telus decision, Canadian businesses seeking to ensure the enforceability of their arbitration clauses should: 

  • Use broadly-worded clauses:  A stay of proceedings can only be fully effective if the arbitration agreement is sufficiently broad to deal with all of the matters in dispute.  Parties should use language that covers all claims arising out of their relationship regardless of whether the claims are contractual or not. 
  • Ensure a fair arbitration procedure:  Both the majority and minority opinions in Telus signaled that courts will look more closely at whether contracts of adhesion containing arbitration clauses are unconscionable.  Indeed, the majority cited with approval a recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision finding that Uber’s use of a widely accepted set of international arbitration rules was unconscionable in its contracts of adhesion with drivers.10  Companies should incorporate arbitration rules that all can handle smaller disputes fairly and efficiently, e.g. without imposing large filing fees on the parties.

Consider the potential for consolidation:  The Telus decision notes that the potential for a multiplicity of proceedings is a foreseeable result of the contracting parties’ choice of arbitration.  In some cases, parties may wish to obtain the advantages of arbitration while still consolidating related claims.  Some, but not all, arbitration rules allow for consolidation of related claims provided that all relevant parties have consented to this possibility in their agreements.  Businesses should review their contracts to determine whether or not their arbitration agreements provide for consolidation of related disputes.

Footnote

1 2019 SCC 19 “Telus

2 Consumer Protection Act, 2002 S.O. 1992, c.30

3 Class Proceedings Act, 1992 S.O.1992, c.6

4 Arbitration Act, 1991 S.O. 1991, c17, s.7

5 Telus at para.33

6 For example, in Radewych v. Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Ltd., 2007 ONCA 721, the Court of Appeal refused to stay a claim by a homeowner against a builder where the plaintiff had named the home’s architect and a sub-contractor as co-defendants. 

7 Arbitration Act, s.7(1)

8 Arbitration Act, s.7(2)

9 Arbitration Act, s.7(5)

10 Heller v. Uber Technologies Inc., 2019 ONCA 1 invalidating a standard ICC arbitration clause  

The foregoing provides only an overview and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone. Rather, specific legal advice should be obtained.

© McMillan LLP 2019

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

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

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
 
In association with
Practice Guides
by Mondaq Advice Centres
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please 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

Mondaq.com (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 www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com 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.

Disclaimer

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.

General

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