In Gestion PMOD Inc. v. 9e Bit (2015) Inc., 2019 QCCS 1154, Mr. Justice Steve J. Reimnitz homologated an award despite one of the dispositive orders omitting mention of the exact amounts due by respondent. Contrary to the opposite result in Carpenter v. Soudure Plastique Québec Inc. 2019 QCCS 321 in which the court refused to homologate an order which did not liquidate damages, Reimnitiz J. held that the award was capable of being executed. The award referred to an exhibit listing the amounts due as well as respondent’s admission that they were due.
Continue reading “Québec – award still capable of being executed despite order not mentioning amounts owing by respondent – #190”Québec – arbitration agreement prevents defendant from adding third party as defendant-in-warranty – #189
In Svensson v. Groupe Ovo inc., 2019 QCCS 1278, Mr. Justice Yves Poirier refused a defendant’s motion to implead a third party as its defendant-in-warranty because the civil procedure allowing defendant to do so must yield to the parties’ arbitration agreement. The court’s procedural solution allowing a defendant to join its proposed action-in-warranty to an existing litigation is suppletive and gives no jurisdiction to the court to grant the motion or override the primacy of arbitration procedure.
Continue reading “Québec – arbitration agreement prevents defendant from adding third party as defendant-in-warranty – #189”Québec – parties’ autonomy favours allowing arbitrator to decide jurisdiction first even if some claims appear beyond it – #188
In 9338-3941 Québec inc. v. 9356-2379 Québec inc., 2019 QCCS 1221, Madam Justice Danye Daigle referred the parties to arbitration despite the possibility that some of relief sought might not be covered by the arbitration agreement. Daigle J. preferred to have the arbitrator rule first on jurisdiction and then allow the parties to apply to the court for review or decision, rather than the reverse sequence. Doing so would respect the parties autonomy to choose how to resolve their disputes.
Continue reading “Québec – parties’ autonomy favours allowing arbitrator to decide jurisdiction first even if some claims appear beyond it – #188”Québec – arbitration agreement with optional wording not a complete undertaking to arbitrate – #186
In Prométal inc. v. Maxim Construction inc., 2019 QCCS 1207, Mr. Justice Bernard Tremblay refused to refer the litigants to arbitration, holding that they had failed to agree in a clear and unequivocal way to exclude the resolution of their disputes from the courts. To allow defendant to present its motion for referral, Tremblay J. applied the longer 90 day delay available under article 622 of Québec’s Code of Civil Procedure, CQLR c C-25.01 to do so, holding that the standard, shorter 45 day delay did not apply because some of the dispute involved elements outside of Québec.
Continue reading “Québec – arbitration agreement with optional wording not a complete undertaking to arbitrate – #186”Québec – court lacks jurisdiction to refer parties to arbitration where dispute involves $15,000.00 or less – #177
Mr. Justice Daniel Bourgeois in Medeiros v. Jan-Pro Canada Est, 2019 QCCQ 663 held that he had no jurisdiction sitting in Court of Québec, Small Claims Division to refer the parties to arbitration because an arbitration tribunal did not qualify as a ‘court’ under article 547 al. 2(2) of Québec’s Code of Civil Procedure, CQLR c C-25.01 (“C.C.P.”) governing the options available to parties. Instead of a referral, Bourgeois J. suspended the court proceedings in Small Claims Division pending an arbitration tribunal’s determination of the validity of the arbitration clause.
Continue reading “Québec – court lacks jurisdiction to refer parties to arbitration where dispute involves $15,000.00 or less – #177”Québec – court enjoins reluctant arbitral party to abide by earlier court decision enforcing award – #174
In SDC Habitations Saint-Maurice phase III v. Raymond Chabot Administrateur, 2019 QCCS 636, Madam Justice Jocelyn Geoffroy summarily dispensed with a Respondent’s persistent refusal to abide by an award which had been recognized and enforced as a judgment of the Québec Superior Court. The application to the court prompted a seldom needed level of court intervention in support of arbitration. The court’s brief reasons reflect that respect for a resolution of disputes is rooted in a respect for the rule of law.
Continue reading “Québec – court enjoins reluctant arbitral party to abide by earlier court decision enforcing award – #174”[:en]Québec – non-respect of delays in arbitration agreement insufficient to annul award – #168[:]
[:en]In Carpenter v. Soudure Plastique Québec inc., 2019 QCCS 321, Madam Justice Silvana Conte refused to annul an award merely because delays in the arbitration agreement had been exceeded or that the arbitrator had reserved jurisdiction on certain issues. She held that the delays had not only been waived but were insufficient to undermine the award and that arbitrators had jurisdiction to reserve issues for later determination. Despite an initial willingness to pay, Defendant successfully argued that certain payment orders were vague, leading Conte J. to homologate the award only in part. Because the monetary value of the disputed orders fell below her jurisdiction, she referred the parties to the Court of Québec to determine whether they had a binding, post-award settlement agreement regarding payment.
Continue reading “[:en]Québec – non-respect of delays in arbitration agreement insufficient to annul award – #168[:]”[:en]Québec – unfounded challenges to final award declared abusive, exposes Respondents to damages – #167[:]
[:en]Applying Québec’s Code of Civil Procedure, CQLR c C-25.01, Mr. Justice Gérard Dugré in Leduc v. Ayoub, 2019 QCCS 457 declared that Respondents’ challenges to a final arbitration award were manifestly unfounded and abusive, exposing Respondents to damages. Dugré J. determined that Respondents’ challenges amounted to an indirect appeal of the award and would require the court to exceed the limited role given to it when recognizing and enforcing awards. Continue reading “[:en]Québec – unfounded challenges to final award declared abusive, exposes Respondents to damages – #167[:]”
Québec – successful arbitral party seizes assets in hands of third party pending homologation of award – #160
[:en]In Instrubel N.V. v. Republic of Iraq, 2019 QCCA 78, Québec’s Court of Appeal upheld a successful arbitral claimant’s attempt to garnish funds owed by a third party to respondent pending an application to recognize and enforce its award. The Court determined that, independent of the location of the bank in which the funds were deposited, garnishee was domiciled within the jurisdiction of the courts of Québec and could be the subject of a garnishment when it is a debtor of a personal right owed to respondent. In reversing Instrubel, N.V. v. Ministry of Industry of The Republic of Iraq, 2016 QCCS 1184, the reasons provide meaningful, informed guidance for arbitration practitioners striving to preserve assets in anticipation of executing on successful arbitration awards. Continue reading “Québec – successful arbitral party seizes assets in hands of third party pending homologation of award – #160”
[:en]Québec – one party’s omission to respond fully to other’s claim does not limit scope of arbitration – #157[:]
[:en]In Garantie de construction résidentielle (GCR) v. Ewart, 2019 QCCS 40, Madam Justice Danielle Mayrand held that one party’s omission to deal with all components of the other’s claims did not deny the arbitrator jurisdiction to deal with all issues raised in the dispute. Despite the label used by one party to characterize its claim, Mayrand J. held that the arbitrator had correctly dealt with the true nature of the claims in the hearing administered by the Canadian Commercial Arbitration Centre (“CCAC”).
Continue reading “[:en]Québec – one party’s omission to respond fully to other’s claim does not limit scope of arbitration – #157[:]”