Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 NOVEMBER 2016

Strong Support For Arbitration, Even In The Face Of Allegations Of Fraudulent Misrepresentation

The motions judge assumed that a claim based in fraud vitiates an arbitration agreement.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

 The importance of drafting clear arbitration clauses in an agreement was addressed in the recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision of Haas v. Gunasekaram, 2016 ONCA 744 ["Haas"]. In this case, the plaintiff brought an action alleging that he was induced to sign a shareholders' agreement respecting an Italian restaurant located in Toronto based on fraudulent misrepresentations regarding the restaurant's business prospects and management, after the restaurant failed. Haas sought to recover his investment of $200,000.

The shareholders' agreement contained an arbitration clause. As such, the defendants moved to stay the action under section 7 of the Arbitration Act, S.O. 1991, c. 17 [the "Act"], in favour of the arbitration clause. The motions judge refused to stay the action. The defendants appealed the motion judge's decision.

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