6 LEXPERT
|
2017
|
WWW.LEXPERT.CA
PHOTO:
SHUTTERSTOCK
DEFERENCE TO ARBITRATION
Arbitral Authority
A recent Supreme Court of Canada decision on a dispute
between a forestry company and the government of British
Columbia makes it more difficult to gain judicial review of
rulings made by arbitrators, reinforcing the court's deference
to arbitral awards. On June 22, 2017, the SCC ruling in Teal
Cedar Products v. British Columbia, 2017 SCC 32, affirmed
that only questions of law, not fact, can provide grounds for
leave to appeal an arbitral award, and addressed the standard
of review in such appeals. e SCC "is reaffirming the mes-
sage that it and various courts of appeal have sent out over
the past decade or more, that when parties decide to arbitrate
disputes and the arbitrator makes a decision, a great deal of
deference is to be given by the court to the arbitral tribunal,"
says John Terry, a partner at Torys LLP in Toronto.
Arbitration clauses are increasingly included in consumer
contracts, agreements between large companies, and those be-
THE 2017 SCC RULING
IN TEAL REINFORCES
THE SCC'S BROAD
DEFERENCE TOWARD
ARBITRAL DECISIONS,
EVEN WHEN TRIBUNALS
ARE FOUND TO HAVE
ERRED ON QUESTIONS
OF FACT
By Sheldon Gordon
