In, Ledcor Construction Ltd. v. Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37, the Supreme Court of Canada has held that the interpretation of a standard form contract is a matter of law alone, and not a matter of mixed fact and law. Accordingly, it is not sufficient for a judge to arrive at a reasonable […]
Continue Reading →Standard Form Contracts Are To Be Reviewed On A Standard Of Correctness: Supreme Court Of Canada
Posted by: Construction Law Canada
Review Of Arbitral Awards: Where Is Sattva Taking Us?
Posted by: Construction Law Canada
The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Creston Moly Corp. v. Sattva Capital Corp., 2014 SCC 53 (Sattva) is a seminal decision in the review of arbitral awards. That decision apparently set a wide net of protection around arbitral awards. It did so by ruling that an arbitral award interpreting a contract should usually be […]
Continue Reading →Grounds For Reviewing Arbitration Decisions Are Narrow: B.C. Court of Appeal
Posted by: Construction Law Canada
A recent decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal warned that the grounds for reviewing an arbitral award are narrow. In Boxer Capital Corp. v. JEL Investments Ltd., the court noted that arbitral dispute had gone through two separate arbitrations and nine (yes, nine) judicial proceedings already. The Court of Appeal said: “Surely that […]
Continue Reading →The Supreme Court Of Canada Proclaims 10 Rules For The Interpretation Of Contracts And The Review Of Arbitration Awards
Posted by: Construction Law Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada’s recent decision in Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp. is a remarkable document. It is more than a judicial decision. It is literally a textbook or checklist for the interpretation of contracts and the review of arbitration decisions. Background First, the context. Creston agreed to pay Sattva a finder’s […]
Continue Reading →What Is The Effect Of Res Judicata On Arbitration?
Posted by: Construction Law Canada
The recent decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court in Boxer Capital Corp. v. JEL Investments Ltd. raises some fascinating issues with respect to the application of the doctrine of res judicata to the arbitration process. The court effectively held that res judicata applies with all its force and effect to arbitration. For this reason, […]
Continue Reading →When Is A Commercial Arbitration Decision Unreasonable?
Posted by: Construction Law Canada
Canadian courts will generally over-rule a decision of a domestic arbitral tribunal only if the decision is “unreasonable.” What does this word mean? Is the standard of “unreasonableness” different in a commercial arbitration than, say, in a labour or employment arbitration? If the arbitral award is found to fall within the bounds of reasonableness by […]
Continue Reading →The Mother Of All Tender Cases Revisited: Three More Issues
Posted by: Construction Law Canada
The last article about the decision of the Superior Court of Ontario in Envoy Relocation Services Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2013 ONSC 2034 considered the impact of that case upon the Contract A – Contract B principles of tender law. There are many more interesting issues which emerge from that case. This article considers […]
Continue Reading →How Correct Does An Arbitrator Have To Be?
Posted by: Construction Law Canada
What margin of error does an arbitrator have? Should an arbitral tribunal’s decision be set aside if it is legally incorrect? Or should a wider deference be shown, so that a decision will only be set aside if it is unreasonable, or perverse? And how detailed does an arbitral decision have to be? Can it […]
Continue Reading →