Alberta – court orders which advanced arbitration set aside due to irregular service outside of jurisdiction

In Acciona Infrastructure Canada Inc v. Posco Daewoo Corporation, 2019 ABCA 241, Alberta’s Court of Appeal set aside ex parte orders which validated ex juris service, appointed arbitrators and consolidated arbitrations due to Plaintiff’s non-compliance with the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters and service ex juris under Alberta Rules of Court, Alta Reg 124/2010.  Acknowledging Plaintiff’s frustration with Defendant’s procedural responses and the practical effect of adding to the delays, the Court declined to retroactively validate irregular service due to significant deficiencies in service.

Continue reading “Alberta – court orders which advanced arbitration set aside due to irregular service outside of jurisdiction”

Alberta – decision illustrates role of interim costs to ensure arbitration process moves forward

In Alanen v. Elliott, 2019 ABCA 290, Madam Justice Elizabeth Hughes reiterated that the Court of Appeal had no jurisdiction to grant permission to appeal an arbitration award “outright”, its jurisdiction limited to appeals of Court of Queen’s Bench decisions under sections 44, 45 and 47 of Alberta’s Arbitration Act, RSA 2000, c A-43.  By declining to deal with the initial appeal from an interim costs award, the chambers judge had issued no decision subject to the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction under that legislation.  The reasons also illustrate the role of interim costs to ensure that arbitration process moves forward while treating parties equally and fairly and giving parties opportunity to present their case and respond to the other party’s.

Continue reading “Alberta – decision illustrates role of interim costs to ensure arbitration process moves forward”

Alberta – creature of statute, non-party can initiate arbitration where same legislation imposes its obligations and arbitration

In TransAlta Generation Partnership v. Balancing Pool, 2019 ABCA 318, the Alberta Court of Appeal upheld dismissal of a challenge to arbitration initiated by an entity which was created by legislation but was not party to contracts stemming from the legislation.  The Court determined that the statutory scheme which created the non-party did not limit its right to dispute its significant financial obligations to compensate the contracting parties in certain disputes.  The Court’s handling of the implied exclusion rule lends itself to other legislative schemes created in the public interest.

Continue reading “Alberta – creature of statute, non-party can initiate arbitration where same legislation imposes its obligations and arbitration”

Alberta – couple unable to litigate property dispute they agreed to delegate to parents

In Mahajan v. Mahajan, 2019 ABQB 495, Mr. Justice Michael J. Lema stayed a divorce proceeding to provide time for the couple’s four (4) parents to resolve a property dispute delegated to them by the couple in their post-separation agreement.  Lema J. held that no uncertainty existed regarding who would resolve the dispute but only uncertainty as to how they would do so. 

Continue reading “Alberta – couple unable to litigate property dispute they agreed to delegate to parents”

Alberta – court has no jurisdiction to extend statutory time limit in which to seek leave to appeal award

Alberta’s Court of Appeal in Allen v. Renouf, 2019 ABCA 250 upheld a chambers judge’s decision to dismiss an application for leave to appeal on the basis that the court had no jurisdiction to extend a statutory time limit set out in the Arbitration Act, RSA 2000, c A-43.  The arbitrator’s reserve of jurisdiction to issue a costs award did not suspend or add to that time period to challenge the earlier award on the merits.  Case law also distinguishes calculating delays based on the ‘date of the decision’ and the ‘making of the decision’ and should apply with equal merit to delays applicable to arbitration awards.

Continue reading “Alberta – court has no jurisdiction to extend statutory time limit in which to seek leave to appeal award”