Catherine Jing Ou

How does the Court respect and protect the confidentiality of arbitration proceedings and arbitral awards in Québec?

In the most recent decision, the Superior Court of Québec emphasizes that according to Art. 4 C.C.P., there is a legitimate PUBLIC POLICY INTEREST in preserving the confidentiality of anything said, written or done during the arbitration proceedings and the arbitral awards (79411 USA Inc. c. Mondofix Inc. 2020 QCCS1104 and Urbitral Notes). Such confidentiality could be considered as the “levure” of this flexible, efficient and autonomous alternative dispute resolution process which requires an open and creative approach to resolve the disputes. On the application for the homologation of the arbitral award on the dispute between Fix Auto and Mondofix, the Court not only homologates the Award but also orders that the Award be filed under seal and withdraws the exhibits from the Court Record.

Comment la Cour se prononce-t-elle sur la compétence du tribunal arbitral conventionnel au Québec? How does the Court rule on the jurisdictional issues of the consensual arbitral tribunals in Québec?

D’abord, il importe de rappeler que c’est en vertu de l’art. 632 al. 3 C.p.c. que les tribunaux judiciaires peuvent intervenir À LA SUITE d’une décision arbitrale sur sa propre compétence. Alors, il est acquis que l’art. 529 et s. C.p.c. ne sont pas pertinents dans un contexte d’arbitrage conventionnel (Desputeaux v. Éditions Chouette (1987) inc., 2003 CSC 17).

How do the courts react on the arbitral jurisdictional issues in Ontario?

The jurisdiction of a consensual arbitrator flows from the authority given by the parties to the agreement. According to the competence-competence principle, the arbitral tribunal possesses jurisdiction to decide the scope of disputes between the parties according to the common intention consolidated in the arbitration agreement signed by those parties who agree to be bound by the arbitral process.