Québec Law—Court Extends Arbitrator’s Immunity to Appointing Authority

In B Smart Technology Inc. v. American Arbitration Association, 2022 QCCS 1526, Justice Mark Phillips granted the defendants’ application for dismissal of the plaintiff’s Request for Provisional Interlocutory Injunction and Order to Safeguard the Rights of Plaintiff. The defendants were the American Arbitration Association (AAA) and the arbitrator it had appointed. In its request, plaintiff sought orders: (1) to recuse and replace the arbitrator; (2) to review the arbitration proceedings, including the costs of the proceedings, the reimbursement for arbitrator’s fees paid to date; and (3) alternatively, the annulment of the arbitration clause and referral of the dispute to the Superior Court.

Justice Phillips’s judgment was mainly based on the application of two well-known principles in arbitration law: arbitrator protection against prosecution/immunity (sec. 621 CCP); and the exclusion of court review except as provided by law (sec. 622 CCP). Justice Phillips reaffirmed that the arbitrator’s protection against prosecution is broad and applies both to the arbitrator’s liability and to any challenges against the conduct of the arbitration process itself. He found that the institute offering arbitration services is covered by the protection as well. Justice Phillips also confirmed the exclusion of court review principle, which prevents courts from interfering in an arbitration process other than within the strict and limited occasions provided by law. In this case, the law did not provide for court intervention. Finally, the issue was moot because the arbitrator terminated the arbitration for the plaintiffs’ failure to pay his costs, as he was entitled to do under the AAA Rules.