Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 OCTOBER 2013

A Case Of Interest: SCC Rules On Arbitrators' Ability To Award Interest In British Columbia

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Contributor
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

As one of Canada’s top business law firms, Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP (Blakes) provides...

View firm profile
Explore more from Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

Commercial arbitration has a long, established history of allowing parties to resolve their disputes on their own terms.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Commercial arbitration has a long, established history of allowing parties to resolve their disputes on their own terms. Despite this long history, the distinction between the scope of authority of arbitrators and courts is a subject that frequently arises. In British Columbia (Forests) v. Teal Cedar Products Ltd., the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) considered the distinction between arbitrators and courts with respect to awarding interest. Specifically, the SCC considered whether arbitrators in British Columbia were subject to the same limitations as courts in ordering interest pursuant to B.C.'s Court Order Interest Act.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Teal Cedar Products Ltd. (Teal) is a forestry company that held a forest licence issued by the province (Province) to harvest timber in a particular area of B.C., including the right to cut a certain amount of timber known as an allowable annual cut. In 1999, following the creation of a provincial park, Teal's allowable annual

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from