加拿大魁北克法院如何尊重和保护商事仲裁的保密性 – 以79411 USA Inc. v. Mondofix Inc. 案为例

本文将介绍加拿大魁北克法院对79411 USA Inc.v. Mondofix Inc.案的判决。该判决能让我们了解加拿大魁省民事诉讼法及其他相关法规对商事仲裁的保密性原则的规定以及加拿大魁省法院对商事仲裁的保密性进行司法保护的具体措施。

(一)案例简介

79411 USA Inc.(Fix Auto)和Mondofix Inc.(Mondofix)之间因许可协议的续约问题产生纠纷。当事人双方曾依据魁省法律以及加拿大商业仲裁中心商业仲裁规则(Canadian Commercial Arbitration Centre General Commercial Arbitration Rules)签订仲裁条款。因此,Fix Auto和Mondofix通过仲裁程序解决了纠纷。仲裁裁决认定当事人双方的许可协议将续约至2027年。

Continue reading “加拿大魁北克法院如何尊重和保护商事仲裁的保密性 – 以79411 USA Inc. v. Mondofix Inc. 案为例”

Confidentiality of Consensual Arbitration in Quebec – WriteToLearn Notes

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.

Continue reading “Confidentiality of Consensual Arbitration in Quebec – WriteToLearn Notes”

加拿大联邦创业移民(Canada Start-up Visa Program)申请被拒案始末

本文将以Bui v.Canada (Citizenship and Immigration),2019 FC 440的判决为例向读者介绍加拿大联邦创业移民的基本要求,加拿大移民官审理该类申请的基本流程,申请被拒的原因以及联邦法院对移民官的决定做司法审查的思路。

(一)加拿大联邦创业移民项目申请基本要求:

1. 有一个经认可的创业项目;

2. 主申请人须获得加拿大联邦政府指定机构(企业孵化器项目,天使投资集团或风险投资基金)的支持信;

3. 主申请人的英语水平应达到雅思普通类考试5级以上;

4. 有足够的资金支持移民主申请人及其随行家庭成员在加拿大的生活开销;

5. 其他移民申请基本要求,如身体健康,无犯罪记录等。

Continue reading “加拿大联邦创业移民(Canada Start-up Visa Program)申请被拒案始末”

Une étude préliminaire sur la compétence du tribunal arbitral conventionnel au Québec

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).

Continue reading “Une étude préliminaire sur la compétence du tribunal arbitral conventionnel au Québec”

A Preliminary Study of Ontario Arbitral Awards on Jurisdictional Issues

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.

Continue reading “A Preliminary Study of Ontario Arbitral Awards on Jurisdictional Issues”