J. Speyer

The applicants, a franchisor, brought an application to compel a corporate franchisee and its individual principal and his wife to submit to arbitration, and to appoint an arbitrator.

The court held that it had jurisdiction to determine whether the individuals were bound by the arbitration agreement, as the issue required only superficial consideration of the documentary evidence.

The court found that the individuals were not parties to the franchise agreement and therefore could not be compelled to arbitrate.

The court appointed the applicants' proposed arbitrator to arbitrate the dispute between the franchisor and the corporate franchisee.

The respondent was charged with careless driving.

During a court appearance where the respondent intended to plead guilty to an amended charge, the justice of the peace noticed the informant's name was missing from the information and quashed it on her own motion.

The Crown applied for certiorari and mandamus.

The Superior Court found the justice of the peace committed jurisdictional errors by raising the motion herself, failing to consider whether an amendment would prejudice the respondent, and refusing to allow extrinsic evidence to cure the defect.

The application was allowed, the order quashing the information was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Provincial Offences Court.