News & Insights

Four Canadian courts released arbitration decisions in August 2026. The BC Court of Appeal vacated a costs finding made without allowing the parties to make submissions and sent the issue back to the arbitrator. The BC Supreme Court stayed an entire court action in favour of arbitration, including claims against a company that had never signed the arbitration agreement. The Alberta Court of King’s Bench dismissed an appeal challenging an arbitrator’s interpretation of a supply contract on all four grounds. The Ontario Superior Court also paused an arbitration while a bias challenge is before the court, setting the standard for when such a stay may be ordered.

When a business partner wants to leave, the shareholders’ or partnership agreement usually settles the price of the share and who can buy it. It rarely settles the rest of the exit: notice, client communication, and what the departing partner may do afterwards. Exits that go wrong rarely go wrong over price. They go wrong over the conversation nobody structured. Negotiation and settlement counsel exists to manage that part.

Rarely, and only on narrow grounds. Five decisions from Ontario and British Columbia in July 2026 show a consistently high threshold for judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings and awards. In Mandani v. Arasi, however, the award was set aside because the arbitrator had failed to disclose an ongoing professional relationship with a party.

The arbitration clause is usually the last thing negotiated and the first thing that matters when a dispute arises. In international commercial contracts, a well-drafted arbitration clause is the foundation of effective dispute resolution: it determines where disputes will be heard, under what rules, by whom, and how the party can ultimately enforce the arbitral award. A poorly drafted clause does not just create procedural inconvenience. It can render the entire dispute resolution mechanism unworkable.

As general counsel managing complex international disputes, you have multiple options for legal representation: large law firms, boutique practices, or private arbitration specialists. Each model serves different needs, and understanding what a private practice offers can help you make the right choice for your specific matter.

Many law firms default to engaging a local law firm in the relevant country when managing complex cross-border arbitrations involving jurisdictions unfamiliar to them. While this approach often makes sense, it is not always optimal.