The appellant appealed an order staying his Ontario contract action against the respondents on the basis that Ontario lacked jurisdiction simpliciter and Florida was the most convenient forum.
The appellant argued the motion judge erred by relying on a privileged letter, finding the agreement contained a Florida arbitration provision, and failing to consider the risk of a multiplicity of proceedings.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the motion judge correctly applied the Muscutt test, the letter was not privileged, and the factual findings were supported by the evidence.
