CLOUTindex.
index.
Case 16: MAL 1; 5; 23(1); 34, especially 34(2)(a)(iii)
Canada: British Columbia Court of Appeal (Hutcheon, Proudfoot and Giggs, JJ.A.)
24 October 1990
Quintette Coal Limited v. Nippon Steel Corp. et al.
Published in English and French: Canada Supreme Court Reports 1990 volume 2
The appropriate standard of review of arbitral awards is one which preserves the autonomy of the forum chosen by the parties and minimizes judicial intervention.
Quintette, a Canadian company, agreed to supply coal to the respondent, a Japanese company. Their agreement provided that any contract disputes would be submitted to binding arbitration under British Columbia Law. Accordingly, a dispute concerning the interpretation of a contract clause outlining a pricing mechanism was referred to arbitration and an award rendered. Quintette, relying on sections 5 and 34 of the Model Law as enacted by the International Commercial Arbitration Act, Statutes of British Columbia, 1986, c. 14 sought to set aside the award on the grounds that the arbitrators had exceeded their jurisdiction by dealing with a matter not contemplated by or falling within the scope of the submission to arbitration.
The Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's affirmation of the award. The Court noted the world-wide trend toward restricting the scope of judicial intervention into commercial arbitration. The award could be justified under the terms of the contract so the Court was prevented from intervening under article 34(2)(a)(iv) of the British Columbia Act (which is the same as article 34(2)(a)(iii) of the Model Law).
(The Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal from the British Columbia Court of
Appeal judgment on 13 December 1990.)
Additional Information published in later CLOUT issue (on "4 November 1993"):
The correct reference to the publication of the judgement is "Published in English: 1 Western Weekly Reports, 1991, 219".
Commented on by Tetley in [1993] Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly, 238.
Commented on by Paterson in Williamette Law Review, Vol. 27, 573.
Additional Information published in later CLOUT issue (on "9 February 2000"):
Abstract published in English: [1995] Model Arbitration Law Quarterly Reports, Vol. 1, issue 2, 11
Text of the court decision published in English: [1995] Model Arbitration Law Quarterly Reports, Vol. 1, issue 1, 16
UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW
CASE LAW ON UNCITRAL TEXTS (CLOUT)
Abstracts of cases
This compilation of abstracts forms part of the system for collecting and disseminating information on court decisions and arbitral awards relating to Conventions and Model Laws that have emanated from the work of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). Information about the features of that system and about its use is provided in the User Guide (A/CN.9/SER.C/GUIDE/1).
The abstracts have been prepared by national correspondents designated by their Governments. It should be noted that neither the national correspondents nor anyone else directly or indirectly involved in the operation of the system assumes any responsibility for any error or omission or other deficiency.
__________
Copyright United Nations 1993
All rights reserved.
Reproduced on this web site (www.interarb.com) with the kind permission of the United Nations, New York.
Database, typography, layout, etc. © interarb, 1999.