In Charlottetown Equities Ltd. v. Charlottetown Airport Authority Inc., 2020 PESC 41, Madam Justice Nancy L. Key dismissed a set aside application which alleged arbitral misconduct. Stating that an applicant must support its allegation of bias by evidence, Key J. reminded that “the threshold for a finding of bias is high and suspicion is not enough”. Key J. confirmed that a set aside invoking misconduct constituted neither a judicial review nor an appeal and stressed that she must base her review on the record as a whole. The record included two (2) e-mails exchanged between the party appointed arbitrators which Key J. described as “vital” to her decision. Those e-mails formed part of the record on which the Chair had based his decision and, having been referenced by the Chair in his reasons, allowed Key J. to qualify the Chair’s reasons as sufficient. Key J. determined that applicant had agreed to the process by which the arbitration panel’s terms of reference had been drafted and, having contributed to and approved of those terms, could not afterwards allege that a panel member showed bias by drafting those terms.
Continue reading “P.E.I. – set aside application invoking arbitral misconduct is neither a judicial review nor an appeal – #422”P.E.I. – arbitral institution denied opportunity to contribute on key issues raised by challenge to award – #243
In HZPC Americas v. Skye View Farms & Ano, 2019 PECA 25, the P.E.I. Court of Appeal upheld a motions judge’s discretionary decision denying an arbitral institution leave to intervene in a challenge to an award. Limiting its review to whether the decision was reasonable on those grounds raised in appeal, the Court did not itself express its own view of key issues which had prompted the arbitral institution’s involvement. For more background on the parties involved and issues in first instance, see the Arbitration Matters note “Arbitral institution denied leave to intervene in jurisdiction-based challenge to arbitral award”.
Continue reading “P.E.I. – arbitral institution denied opportunity to contribute on key issues raised by challenge to award – #243”[:en]P.E.I. – arbitral institution denied leave to intervene in jurisdiction-based challenge to arbitral award – #145[:]
[:en]In HZPC Americas v. Skye View Farms, 2018 PESC 47, Mr. Justice Gordon L. Campbell determined that an arbitral institution would not contribute anything useful to an appeal arguing an excess of jurisdiction of the institution’s arbitration rules. The institution’s concern for the precedential value of the appeal did not justify it being added to the appeal as the arguments it could make could be made by either of the existing parties. The institution’s claim to have a global outlook of the potential adverse impact of an “unfavourable” result was insufficient to grant the institution leave to intervene. Continue reading “[:en]P.E.I. – arbitral institution denied leave to intervene in jurisdiction-based challenge to arbitral award – #145[:]”
[:en]P.E.I. – legislation imposes arbitration before a judge in order to resolve disputes over compensation owing from expropriation – #016[:]
[:en]Unlike most other court decisions in which litigants apply to a judge to send the parties to arbitration or to review an arbitral award, the judge in Haras Management et al. v. Gov. of P.E.I., 2017 PESC 14 was appointed by provincial legislation to sit as an arbitrator to resolve the parties’ dispute and her award was subject to the province’s Arbitration Act, RSPEI 1988, c A-16. Continue reading “[:en]P.E.I. – legislation imposes arbitration before a judge in order to resolve disputes over compensation owing from expropriation – #016[:]”