|
Arbitration - Public Policy. InFrontier AF LP v. Rahmani
In InFrontier AF LP v. Rahmani (Ont CA, 2026) the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal, this brought against a ruling where "the application judge recognized, as binding and enforceable in Ontario, an arbitral award (the “Award”) that resulted from an arbitration conducted in the Dubai International Financial Centre (“DIFC”), a common law jurisdiction in Dubai, United Arab Emirates".
The court considers 'public policy', here in the context of private arbitration tribunal awards (where, presumbly, such concerns may be more real than with the courts?):[51] “[T]o succeed on [the public policy ground] the award must fundamentally offend the most basic and explicit principles of justice and fairness in Ontario, or evidence intolerable ignorance or corruption on the part of the Arbitral Tribunal”: Corporacion Transnacional de Inversiones, S.A. de C.V. v. STET International, S.p.A., 1999 CanLII 14819 (ON SC), 45 O.R. (3d) 183 (S.C.), at para. 30, aff’d (2000) 2000 CanLII 16840 (ON CA), 49 O.R. (3d) 414 (C.A.); see also Clayton v. Canada (Attorney General), 2024 ONCA 581, 500 D.L.R. (4th), at paras. 35-37. The application judge made no reversible error in finding that such circumstances were not present here.
|
