Siddiqui v. Juzkiw, 2018 ONSC 1230

1The applicant, Fawad Siddiqui, has brought an application for judicial review of an arbitration decision pursuant to a consensual arbitration under the LAWPRO policy. At the outset the Court requested that the parties address the issues of the Court’s jurisdiction to hear this matter and prematurity.

2This is a private arbitration rather than the exercise of a statutory decision-making power. In addition, and in any event, there is a right of appeal available to the applicant under s. 45 of the Arbitration Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c.17 and a right of application to set aside the award under s. 46 of that statute under the circumstances contemplated therein. While the applicant’s grounds for judicial review are not entirely clear, they would fall within one or both of these provisions. Each of these provisions contemplates that a proceeding would be brought before a single judge of the Superior Court.

3An application for judicial review, if it lies at all in the present circumstances, is therefore premature.

4Accordingly, this application for judicial review is dismissed.

5I have endorsed the Application Record as follows: “This application is dismissed for oral reasons delivered today. Costs in the amount of $1,000 on an all-inclusive basis are awarded in favour of the respondent.”

___________________________ WILTON-SIEGEL J.

I agree