Gabriel Christophe Poliquin

The applicants sought to set aside three arbitral awards under s. 46 of the Arbitration Act, 1991, alleging procedural unfairness regarding damages quantification and witness exclusion.

The respondents sought to enforce the awards.

The court dismissed the applicants' motion, affirming the narrow scope of judicial review for arbitral awards under s. 46, which focuses on procedural fairness rather than substantive errors.

The court found the arbitrator's reasons adequate and that the applicants were treated fairly, despite their disagreement with the arbitrator's evidentiary and damages assessment decisions.

This is a costs endorsement following an appeal concerning a dispute among investors in a residential subdivision.

The appeal, brought by 1750714 Ontario Inc. et al., was dismissed.

The court determined the quantum of costs payable by the appellants to the respondent, 1750738 Ontario Inc., on a partial indemnity basis, considering factors such as complexity, importance of issues, and party conduct.

The court awarded a global amount of $32,000 to the respondent.

The applicant, 1750738 Ontario Inc., sought specific performance of a verbal contract against the respondent corporations.

The verbal contract stipulated that Hervé Lacroix would invest in a real estate development project (Oasis) on the condition that his son's company, Maisons Lacroix Homes Inc., would construct 25% of the lots.

The respondents later terminated this arrangement.

The court found that the verbal contract existed, was ratified by 1750739 Ontario Inc. despite preceding its incorporation, was sufficiently certain, and was not precluded by the Statute of Frauds due to part performance.

Furthermore, a "whole agreement" clause in a subsequent shareholders' agreement did not terminate the verbal contract, given the circumstances of its signing and the lack of independent legal advice for Lacroix.

The court also found no convincing evidence of serious misconduct by Maisons Lacroix Homes Inc. that would justify termination.

The court granted specific performance, annulling the termination decision and ordering the allocation of 25% of lots to Maisons Lacroix Homes Inc.