PRACTICE |
Judgments and Orders |
Corp. of Mid St. Lawrence River Pilots v. Laurentian Pilotage Authority
T-708-03
2003 FC 1470, Morneau P.
15/12/03
31 pp.
Motion for homologation of arbitral award (award) made on March 12, 2003, by arbitrator designated by parties to resolve dispute between them--In opposition to that motion, Laurentian Pilotage Authority (LPA) sought to have award quashed, citing five reasons--First argument not accepted, since could not be concluded in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure, art. 946.4(4) that arbitrator's award did not deal with dispute before him--On second ground, also could not be concluded arbitrator went beyond mandate by altering pilotage fees agreed upon for prior years of contract--In final conclusion arbitrator dealt only with year 2002-2003-- Nothing said about altering past rates--In order to arrive at final conclusion, evidence he accepted led him to consider how difference had occurred--Arbitrator's analytical approach could not be confused with final conclusion--As third argument, LPA maintained not within arbitrator's powers to redo analysis of LPA's financial situation--This argument not accepted--In his analysis arbitrator indicated comparison which applicant proposed, and which he accepted, should nevertheless take into account LPA's ability to pay, as its income derived exclusively from pilotage fees charged to shippers--Arbitrator could and had to weigh all evidence, and that is what he did--Fourth ground of challenge also not accepted--LPA maintained by being denied right to question representative of applicant about latter's expenses, LPA denied right to present its case--However, after hearing parties arbitrator reached decision without accepting application for examination by LPA--Cannot seriously argue impossible for LPA to present case within meaning of Code of Cure Procedure, art. 946.4(3)--Finally, LPA argued award contrary to public order since contravened legislation of public order and effect to encumber exercise of powers of supervisory bodies to authorize LPA loans--Under Financial Administration Act, LPA cannot on pain of nullity borrow money without prior authorization from Minister of Finance, Treasury Board and Governor in Council--According to LPA evidence, any increase in pilotage fees for applicant greater than 3% would necessarily require LPA to obtain loan--Arbitrator came to conclusion LPA could handle 8% increase without having to go beyond currently authorized loan capacity--Accordingly, result of award, namely increase of 8%, not contrary to public order as such--Motion to homologate allowed and application to annul award dismissed --Code of Civil Procedure, R.S.Q., c. C-24, art. 946.4-- Financial Administration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-11.