Case number: 114
Article number: model arbitration law / 8(1) ; 16(1)
Thessaurs issue:
Country of decision: Canada
Year of decision: 1994
Type of decision: Judicial decision

Case 114: MAL 8(1) and 16(1)
Canada: British Columbia Supreme Court (Lysyk J.) 18 November 1994
Globe Union Industrial Corp. v. G.A.P. Marketing Corp.
Published in English: [1995] 2 Western Weekly Reports, 696

Globe was a Taiwanese manufacturer who entered into a distribution agreement with G.A.P. granting it a licence to distribute Globe's products in Canada and Mexico. G.A.P. initiated arbitration proceedings under an arbitration clause in the agreement and Globe then commenced the present court proceedings, which G.A.P. sought to stay under s. 8 of the International Commercial Arbitration Act, Statutes of British Columbia, 1986, chapter 14, which enacts MAL.

The court found that, even if the distribution agreement had been terminated between the parties and was assumed to be null and void, it did not mean that the arbitration clause it contained was unenforceable (articles 8(1) and 16(1) MAL). The court also found that the court proceedings were in respect of a matter agreed by the parties to be submitted to arbitration and the fact that G.A.P. responded to Globe's application to enjoin G.A.P. from proceeding with the arbitration did not constitute the taking of a step in the court proceedings so as to justify refusal of a stay.