The Canada Soccer Association Incorporated o/a Canada Soccer v. Association de Soccer de Brossard
COURT FILE NO.: CV-23-00091107-0000
GARNISHMENT NO.: 04700-CV-23A03965606
DATE: 2023/07/24
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: The Canada Soccer Association Incorporated o/a Canada Soccer, Debtor/Applicant
AND
Association de Soccer de Brossard, Collector/Respondent
AND
Royal Bank of Canada, Garnishee
BEFORE: Justice R. Ryan Bell
COUNSEL: Danesh Rana, for the Debtor/Applicant
Timothy Cullen and Ricki-Lee Williams, for the Collector/Respondent
No one appearing for the Garnishee
HEARD: July 24, 2023
ENDORSEMENT
[1] The Canada Soccer Association Incorporated o/a Canada Soccer moved for an interim stay of an arbitral award pending a decision in its application under s. 46 of the Arbitration Act, 1991 to set aside the decision of the SDRCC. The Association de Soccer de Brossard (“ASB”) brought a cross-motion to enforce the arbitral award. I dismissed the motion and granted the cross-motion: The Canada Soccer Association Incorporated v. Association de Soccer de Brossard, 2023 ONSC 1367. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of my February 24, 2023 order provide:
THIS COURT ORDERS that Canada Soccer’s motion seeking a temporary stay of the arbitration award in SDRCC File No: 22-0616 (“Award’) is dismissed.
THIS COURT ORDERS that ASB’s cross-motion is granted. The Award granting ASB a National Youth Club License is hereby enforceable in the same manner as a judgment or an order of this court pursuant to s. 50(5)(a) of the Arbitration Act, 1991, pending the determination of the application.
[2] When Canada Soccer failed to pay the costs of the SDRCC arbitration, ASB commenced garnishment proceedings to recover the unpaid costs. The garnishment materials were served on Canada Soccer and its bank, Royal Bank of Canada.
[3] Canada Soccer brings this motion under r. 60.08(16) of the Rules of Civil Procedure[^1] to prevent ASB from collecting the costs awarded by the SDRCC arbitrator until the final determination of Canada Soccer’s application in this court, now scheduled to be heard on November 2, 2023. ASB moves for an order, if necessary, amending my February 24, 2023 order to explicitly reference the arbitrator’s costs decision and, in the alternative, an order pursuant to s. 50(5)(a) of the Arbitration Act, 1991 enforcing the arbitrator’s costs decision.
[4] Canada Soccer concedes that the arbitrator’s costs decision is part of the arbitral award. On the plain wording of my order, the Award is enforceable in the same manner as a judgment or an order of the court pursuant to s. 50(5)(a) of the Arbitration Act, 1991, pending the determination of the application. Enforcement of the Award includes enforcement of the costs decision.
[5] Relying on r. 1.04, Canada Soccer says that by analogy to r. 63.01(1), the delivery of its notice of application stays any collection process commenced by ASB. Rule 63.01(1) provides that the delivery of a notice of appeal from an interlocutory or final order stays, until the disposition of the appeal, any provision of the order for the payment of money, except a provision that awards support or enforces a support order.
[6] Canada Soccer is incorrect. An arbitration award is not subject to the stay provisions of the Rules of Civil Procedure: 887574 Ontario Inc. v. Pizza Pizza Ltd., at para. 8;[^2] Re International Woodworkers of America and Patchogue Plymouth, Hawkesbury Mills, at paras. 4 and 7.[^3]
[7] As the court discussed in Re International Woodworkers of America, because there is no automatic stay pending the determination of an application, the correct procedure to be followed by a party seeking a stay is to apply for an interim order. I have already denied Canada Soccer’s stay motion, finding that Canada Soccer cannot establish there is a serious issue to be tried because, on their face, the grounds for the application relate to the merits of the arbitrator’s decision: Canada Soccer, at para. 21. There is no evidence before the court that Canada Soccer will suffer irreparable harm if the costs order is not stayed. The balance of convenience favours ASB because Canada Soccer has a greater financial capacity than ASB to bear the financial burden of the costs awarded to ASB by the arbitrator.
[8] Canada Soccer’s submission that the notice of garnishment should be set aside because ASB failed to provide full and frank disclosure is without merit. The costs awarded by the arbitrator are part of the Award, as Canada Soccer concedes. There is no automatic stay pending determination of Canada Soccer’s application. There was no additional disclosure required.
[9] Canada Soccer also submits that the garnishment proceedings should not be permitted to continue because ASB comes to court with unclean hands as a result of the letters it sent to the Minister of Sport. Canada Soccer persists in making the same argument despite it having been rejected by me, both in relation to the prior motions and in relation to the costs of those motions. I repeat:
On the motions, I found that the letters [to the Minister of Sport], on their face, were unrelated to ASB’s cross-motion to enforce the arbitral award: The Canada Soccer Association Incorporated, at para. 34. The letters certainly do not constitute evidence of bad faith conduct so as to deprive ASB of its costs on the motions.[^4]
[10] Canada Soccer’s motion is dismissed. There is no need to amend my order of February 24, 2023 because the Award includes the costs ordered by the arbitrator. The Award – including the costs ordered – is enforceable pursuant to s. 50(5)(a) of the Arbitration Act, 1991.
[11] I understand, however, that the Bank is currently holding $24,166.93 in a separate account as a courtesy to the parties pending the outcome of these motions and seeks direction from the court as to what it should do with the garnished funds; that is, the amount to distribute, the payee and the method of payment. I hereby direct the Bank to collect from Canada Soccer and pay to ASB the sum of $28,355.45, plus an additional $3.79/day for every day from July 25, 2023 until the $28,355.45 is paid, by remitting the money to McMillan LLP in trust using the wire transfer information to be provided by counsel for ASB.[^5]
[12] Both parties have uploaded costs outlines and counsel made brief submissions on costs at the conclusion of the hearing. However, because offers to settle were apparently made, I will permit additional costs submissions (no more than two pages exclusive of relevant attachments). Both parties are to provide any additional costs submissions within 10 days and there will be no responding submissions. If no submissions are received within this timeframe, I will proceed to determine the costs of these motions based on the costs outlines previously delivered.
Justice R. Ryan Bell
Date: July 24, 2023
COURT FILE NO.: CV-23-00091107-0000
GARNISHMENT NO.: 04700-CV-23A03965606
DATE: 2023/07/24
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
RE: The Canada Soccer Association Incorporated o/a Canada Soccer, Debtor/Applicant
AND
Association de Soccer de Brossard, Collector/Respondent
AND
Royal Bank of Canada, Garnishee
BEFORE: Justice R. Ryan Bell
COUNSEL: Danesh Rana, for the Debtor/Applicant
Timothy Cullen and Ricki-Lee Williams, for the Collector/Respondent
No one appearing for the Garnishee
ENDORSEMENT
Ryan Bell J.
Released: July 24, 2023
[^1]: R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194. [^2]: 1995 CarswellOnt 1205 (Ont. C.J. (Gen. Div.)). [^3]: (1976), 1976 CanLII 625 (ON SC), 14 O.R. (2d) 118 (H.C.J.). [^4]: The Canada Soccer Association Incorporated v. Association de Soccer de Brossard, 2023 ONSC 2240, at para. 8. [^5]: Canada Soccer did not challenge these calculations.