← University
Mediation, Arbitration, and Settlement: Alternatives to Trial
0 of 6

A small manufacturing company operating in southwestern Ontario entered into a supply agreement 3 years ago with a regional distributor that handles specialized industrial components for the automotive aftermarket sector. The agreement, which was drafted by the distributor and signed without legal review by the manufacturer's owner, contains a mandatory arbitration clause buried in the standard terms on page 14 of the 18-page contract. The clause requires all disputes arising from the agreement to be submitted to binding arbitration under the rules of a named arbitral institution, with the seat of arbitration in Toronto and costs to be borne equally by both parties regardless of outcome.

The relationship between the parties functioned smoothly for the first 2 years, with the manufacturer supplying components on a quarterly basis and the distributor handling sales across Ontario and Quebec. Difficulties emerged when the distributor began returning larger quantities of product as defective, rejecting shipments that the manufacturer insists met all contractual specifications. The manufacturer believes the returns are pretextual and that the distributor is actually experiencing cash flow problems that make it unable to pay for inventory it ordered. The distributor maintains that quality has declined and that the manufacturer has failed to meet the contractual standard of components suitable for resale without modification.

The dispute involves approximately $287,000 in unpaid invoices that the manufacturer claims are owed, plus another $94,000 worth of product that sits in the distributor's warehouse pending resolution of the quality dispute. The distributor has countered with its own claim for damages arising from alleged breach of the quality warranty, asserting that defective components damaged its reputation with 3 of its largest retail accounts.

Both parties have exchanged correspondence over a 4-month period, with each side's tone escalating from professional concern to accusation to threat of legal action. The manufacturer's owner discovered the arbitration clause only after consulting a lawyer about commencing a court action to collect the outstanding invoices. The distributor has now formally invoked the arbitration clause and demanded that any proceedings take place under that framework rather than in court.

The manufacturer faces several interconnected decisions: whether to challenge the enforceability of the arbitration clause it unknowingly agreed to, whether to propose mediation as a preliminary step before arbitration, how to protect communications made during any settlement discussions from later use as evidence, and how to evaluate which dispute resolution mechanism best serves its interests given the amounts at stake, the ongoing commercial relationship, and the resources available to a business of its size. The distributor, meanwhile, has indicated through informal channels that it might be open to discussing a resolution that preserves the business relationship, though formal positions remain far apart.

Arbitration Clauses in Commercial Contracts: Scope, Enforceability, and Strategy

Arbitration clauses appear in commercial contracts with remarkable frequency, often buried in standard terms that business owners sign without fully appreciating their consequences. These provisions fundamentally alter how disputes will be resolved, removing them from the public court system and placing them instead before private decision-makers whose rulings carry the force of law. For Canadian business owners, understanding how arbitration clauses function, when they can be enforced, and how to approach them strategically represents essential knowledge for managing legal risk in commercial relationships.

The foundation of arbitration in Canada rests on both federal and provincial legislation that gives effect to agreements between parties to submit disputes to binding private resolution. At the federal level, the Commercial Arbitration Act governs arbitrations involving federal Crown corporations and matters within federal jurisdiction, while the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, as implemented through federal legislation, addresses international commercial arbitration. Each province has enacted its own arbitration legislation to govern domestic commercial disputes. British Columbia operates under the Arbitration Act, as does Alberta with its own statute of the same name. Ontario's Arbitration Act, 1991 establishes the framework for that province, while Saskatchewan's Arbitration Act, 1992 serves a similar function. Quebec's approach differs substantially, as the province's civil law tradition means that arbitration is governed by the Civil Code of Quebec alongside the Code of Civil Procedure, which together establish rules that align with civilian legal principles while still permitting binding arbitration. As of the date of authorship, these statutes share common features while diverging in important particulars that affect how arbitration clauses operate in different parts of the country.

That’s the free preview

You’ve reached the end of what’s open to read. The rest of this lesson is part of a $149 course — purchasing unlocks it, or sign in if you already have access.