Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/customer/www/glasnerqc.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/enfold/config-templatebuilder/avia-shortcodes/slideshow_layerslider/slideshow_layerslider.php on line 28
2. South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority v. BMT Fleet Technology Ltd., 2018 BCCA 468 – Kenneth Glasner QC

2. In South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority v. BMT Fleet Technology Ltd., 2018 BCCA 468 the Court dealt with one application to arbitrate under four different contracts, “absent consent of the parties” The headnote states:

“ The respondent transportation authority purported to start a multi-party arbitration under several contracts without the consent of the Parties. The other parties objected to the consolidation of their disputes. The transportation authority filed a petition in the Supreme Court, seeking both a declaration that arbitration had been commenced and the appointment of an arbitrator. The judge held that the original notice to arbitrate was merely an irregular document and, as such, was curable nunc pro tunc. The judge found , accordingly, that arbitration had been commenced and appointed a single arbitrator for all three disputes.

Held: Appeal allowed. The Arbitration Act, with the exception of s. 21, only contemplates the arbitration of disputes arising under an individual Contract. Since the parties did not consent to multi-party, multi-contract arbitration, the s. 21 exception was not engaged in this case. The notice to arbitrate thereby invoked a procedure that was unknown to both the Act and the contracts at issue. This being so, the notice was A nullity.”