ARTICLE
27 January 2025

Top 10 Canadian Arbitration Cases Of 2024: Key Lessons For In-house Counsel

GW
Gowling WLG

Contributor

Gowling WLG is an international law firm built on the belief that the best way to serve clients is to be in tune with their world, aligned with their opportunity and ambitious for their success. Our 1,400+ legal professionals and support teams apply in-depth sector expertise to understand and support our clients’ businesses.
Canadian courts have a strong and consistent track record of enforcing valid arbitration agreements and supporting arbitration as a mode of dispute resolution.
Canada Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Foreword

Canadian courts have a strong and consistent track record of enforcing valid arbitration agreements and supporting arbitration as a mode of dispute resolution. This year's Top 10 Arbitration Cases for In-House Counsel shows this trend continues. However, quite appropriately, where the court needs to intervene to ensure justice, and it has jurisdiction to do so, it will do so. This supports arbitration as an attractive method of dispute resolution by instilling checks and balances and, in turn, confidence in the integrity of the arbitral process in Canada.

With respect to enforcing arbitration agreements, we feature three decisions in which courts in Ontario and Manitoba had to determine whether to stay a proposed class proceeding in favour of arbitration agreements contained in standard form contracts of adhesion. In one of the cases, the Court granted the stay, finding the arbitration agreement valid. In the other two, the class proceedings were allowed to proceed as the arbitration agreements were judged unconscionable or against public policy. These cases demonstrate that, at least with contracts of adhesion, whether accessing arbitration would be unduly onerous for the weaker party will be critical to the question of the enforceability of an arbitration agreement.

We also highlight decisions showing Canadian courts' willingness to support the arbitration process. In one case, the Court refused to stray from the codified grounds for setting aside arbitral awards under international arbitration legislation. In another, the Court acceded to a party's request to assist in obtaining evidence from a third party who refused to cooperate absent a court order. In yet another case, the Court of Appeal for Ontario clarified the standard for arbitrator disclosures, reinstating an award set aside in the court below.

Finally, although Canadian courts will generally not interfere with the merits of an arbitrator's decision, respecting the parties' choice of umpire, they will honour the parties' agreement to involve the court on appeal where the parties have chosen to retain that right. This signals a mature understanding of party autonomy, arbitration's guiding principle.

Index

Read the original article on GowlingWLG.com

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.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More