In Shanghai Investment Co. Ltd. V. Lu et al. 2024 ONSC 2762, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List), allowed a foreign arbitral award to be recognised and made enforceable as a partial summary judgment.
The Plaintiff, Shanghai Lianyin Investment Co Ltd. (“SLIC”) sought the recognition and enforcement of a CAD $233 million arbitral award rendered under the rules of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Committee (“CIETAC”) against the Defendant Zheng Yao Lu (“Lu”) as a threshold matter; and a declaration that the other defendant, Lichun Guo (“Guo”) held her interest in two properties in Ontario on behalf of Lu, and that SLIC could enforce its award against these properties.
The court found that the CIETAC award should be recognised and made enforceable as both of the following requirements under Articles IV and V of the New York Convention (incorporated in the International Commercial Arbitration Act, 2017, S.O. 2017, c. 2, Sch. 5) were satisfied: (a) the mandatory terms for recognition of the award were complied with; and (b) none of the seven limited grounds for refusing recognition existed.
The court held that granting recognition of the award as a threshold issue in the case did amount to a partial summary judgment that was appropriate in the circumstances of the case. The test in Butera v. Chown, Cairns LLP, 2017 ONCA 783, of “whether partial summary judgment [is] appropriate in the context of the litigation as a whole” and the three enquiries formulated in Malik v. Attia, 2020 ONCA 787 were considered by the court:
- Demonstrate that dividing the determination of a case into several parts will prove cheaper for the parties;
- Show how partial summary judgment will get the parties’ case in and out of the court system more quickly; and
- Establish how partial summary judgment will not result in inconsistent findings by the multiple judges who will now touch the divided case.
In answering the above questions, the court found that the recognition of the award was a discrete issue that could be bifurcated from the rest of SLIC’s action and dealt with in an expeditious and cost-effective manner. There was no risk here of inconsistent findings as none of the factual or legal matters were relevant to the issues to be addressed at stage two. Although making Lu subject to enforcement measures for each stage would not shorten the proceedings, neither would the partial summary judgment delay the completion of the action. The significant amount of $233 million that Lu was to pay pursuant to the award, and the delay of over 3 years already encountered were critical considerations in the court’s decision to grant the partial summary judgment.
At Gilbertson Davis LLP, our lawyers can assist you, your business, company, partnership or corporation in applying to the court for the recognition and enforcement in Ontario of your judgment or arbitration award obtained in another jurisdiction. Gilbertson Davis LLP lawyers have experience in proceedings involving Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Recognition and Enforcement of International Arbitration Awards, Commercial Arbitration, Cross-Border Litigation and arbitration, Commercial Litigation, Civil Litigation, Business Torts, Business Litigation, and can assist you in resolving your legal issues in a timely and cost-effective manner. Please contact Gilbertson Davis LLP to schedule a consultation.
Brief informational summaries about insurance litigation, commercial litigation and family law litigation matters in the courts of Ontario and Canada are periodically published on our website. Please note that our website content is for informational purposes only, and should not be construed or relied upon to provide legal advice. If you require legal advice, please request an initial consultation with Gilbertson Davis LLP using the Request Consultation Form on this webpage or by contacting our Intake Coordinator on (416) 979-2020, ext. 223 (both subject to the Terms of Use described on our Contact page).
Comments & Opinions by Gilbertson Davis LLP lawyers and staff on its Blog, or in media interviews, appearances or publications, or in professional publications, are personal to them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Firm or anyone at the Firm other than the individual expressing those comments or opinions.
About the Author
