Legal Blog

Arbitration

Haas v. Gunasekaram 2016 Ont CA

A disappointed investor commenced an action against other shareholders of a corporation for fraudulent misrepresentation and oppression. The shareholders moved to stay the action because the shareholders’ agreement called for arbitration of all disputes regarding the agreement. The Court held that merely because there was a tort claim, in addition to an oppression claim, did not mean that an arbitrator did not have jurisdiction to determine whether the arbitrator had jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal stayed the action.

Written by Jonathan Speigel Jonathan Speigel, the founding partner of Speigel Nichols Fox LLP, leads the litigation and construction practices.