The applicant sought to set aside an arbitral tribunal's interim award on jurisdiction under Articles 16 and 34 of the UNCITRAL Model Law.
In support of its application, the applicant filed new expert evidence that was not before the arbitral tribunal.
A previous judge had ruled that the new evidence was admissible as of right.
The hearing judge reconsidered this interlocutory ruling and held that he had the authority to do so.
The court concluded that fresh evidence in an application to set aside an arbitral tribunal's award on jurisdiction under the Model Law may not be introduced as of right.
Instead, a party must obtain leave by satisfying the test for fresh evidence established in R. v. Palmer.
