Tahir A. Chaudhary

The Applicant, Alberta Cricket Association, sought costs after successfully setting aside an arbitration award.

The Respondent, Alberta Cricket Council, argued that costs should not be awarded or should be significantly reduced, contending that the applicant's success was on a narrow procedural ground (lack of reasons) and that the hearing was unnecessarily lengthy due to multiple grounds raised.

The court rejected these arguments, affirming that normal costs principles apply to successful appellants, regardless of the number of successful grounds, and awarded the applicant the full amount of costs sought.

The applicant, Alberta Cricket Association, applied to set aside an arbitration award that granted provincial sport organization status to the respondent, Alberta Cricket Council.

The arbitrator had concluded that the respondent demonstrated effective control of organized competitive cricket in Alberta, replacing the applicant as the member of Cricket Canada.

The Superior Court of Justice granted the application and set aside the award, finding that the arbitrator failed to provide adequate reasons for her decision as required by section 38(1) of the Arbitration Act, 1991.

A new arbitration was ordered.

Cricket Canada brought an application under section 17(8) of the Arbitration Act, 1991, to challenge the jurisdiction of the Sports Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC) and its appointed arbitrator.

The underlying dispute involved the Alberta Cricket Council (ACC) seeking membership in Cricket Canada, which Cricket Canada argued was outside the SDRCC's jurisdiction.

The court upheld the arbitrator's decision, finding that the SDRCC had jurisdiction over the dispute, interpreting "Sports-Related Dispute" broadly to include disputes among sport organizations concerning participation and membership entitlements.