Originally from:
International Arbitration Court Decisions - 3rd Edition - Looseleaf
International Arbitration Court Decisions - 3rd Edition - Electronic
CANADA
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF APPEAL OF
ALBERTA RENDERED ON 18 JANUARY, 2006
IN CASE 2006 ABCA 18
“The Jardine Case”
Leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Canada
denied on 1 June 2006
Subject Matter:
Whether the assistance that an arbitral tribunal may request from a court in taking
evidence, pursuant to Article 27 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International
Commercial Arbitration, as implemented in Alberta, can include compelling the
pre-hearing oral examination for discovery of third party witnesses.
Findings:
The term “assistance in taking evidence” in Article 27, when interpreted according to
its ordinary meaning in the context and light of the objects and purposes of the
Model Law, is not limited to the taking of evidence at the arbitration hearing. The
ordinary and plain meaning of the term “evidence” includes all evidence, whether
pre-hearing or at the hearing itself.
Parties:
Appellants: SJO Catlin & Others Syndicate Nos. 1003 and 2003 Lloyd’s
of London, et al.
Respondents: Jardine Lloyd Thomson Canada Inc. et al
Place of Court Proceedings:
Alberta, Canada
Applicable Law:
Alberta Law
Place of Arbitral Proceedings:
Calgary, Alberta
CANADA
SJO Catlin & Others Syndicate Nos. 1003 and 2003 Lloyd's of
London, et al. v. Jardin Lloyd Thomson Canada Inc. et al.,
Judgment of the Court of Appeal of Alberta rendered on
18 January 2006 in Case 2006 ABCA 18 ("The Jardine Case")
SUBJECT-MATTER:
Whether the assistance that an arbitral tribunal may request from a
court in taking evidence, pursuant to Article 27 of the UNCITRAL
Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, as implemented
In Alberta, can include compelling the pre-hearing oral examination
for discovery of third party witnesses.
Observations by Henri Alvarez
Observations by Janet E. Mills
