1 / 11

Private ADR Processes and the Proposed Code of Civil Procedure

Private ADR Processes and the Proposed Code of Civil Procedure. Professor Frédéric Bachand Faculty of Law, McGill University frederic.bachand@mcgill.ca. A philosophical paradigm shift Mediation: a solid—though incomplete—framework Arbitration: a misguided and ill-informed effort.

Download Presentation

Private ADR Processes and the Proposed Code of Civil Procedure

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Private ADR Processes and the Proposed Code of Civil Procedure • Professor Frédéric Bachand • Faculty of Law, McGill University • frederic.bachand@mcgill.ca

  2. A philosophical paradigm shift • Mediation: a solid—though incomplete—framework • Arbitration: a misguided and ill-informed effort

  3. I. A philosophical paradigm shift • The Dark Ages of ADR • National Gypsum, [1964] S.C.R. 144 • From hostility to tolerance • Zodiak, [1983] 1 S.C.R. 529 • 1986 reform of Quebec arbitration law • From tolerance to promotion • Laurentienne-Vie, [2000] R.J.Q. 1708 (C.A.); Desputeaux, [2003] 1 S.C.R. 178; Dell, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 801 • Judicial mediation programs • Lawyers’ evolving ethical duties

  4. I. A philosophical paradigm shift • Public adjudication relegated to a subsidiary role • Article 1(1): « Parties must consider the private modes of prevention and resolution [direct negotiation, mediation, arbitration] before referring their dispute to the courts. »

  5. II. The proposed mediation framework • The global trend to regulate private mediation • UNCITRAL Model Law on Int’l Commercial Conciliation (2002); U.S. Uniform Mediation Act (2001, 2003); European Directive on Civil/Commercial Mediation (2008) • What’s the point in regulating mediation? • ***Confidentiality/privilege • ***Quality/integrity of mediation • Effect of undertakings to mediate (i.e. mediation clauses) • Effect of mediated settlements • Prescription • Little need to regulate mediation procedure

  6. II. The proposed mediation framework • Highlights of the proposed framework • Robust impartiality/disclosure standards (Articles 3, 610(3)) • Good faith obligations clearly affirmed (Article 2(1)) • Confidentiality/privilege (Articles 4, 611(1)) • An interesting take on the professionalization debate (Article 611(2)) • Mediation’s darker side acknowledged and taken fairly seriously (Articles 2(1), 616, 618, 619(2)) • Mediator’s immunity (Article 608)

  7. II. The proposed mediation framework • What’s not (and arguably should be) in the proposed framework • Mandatory mediation--at least as a general rule (?) • Costs rules designed to incentivize the parties • Halsey v. Milton Keynes General NHS Trust, [2004] EWCA Civ 576 • Leicester Circuits Ltd. v. Coates Brothers Plc, [2003] EWCA Civ 333

  8. III. The proposed arbitration framework • The 1986 provisions • Followed closely UNCITRAL Model Law on Int’l Commercial Arbitration; implemented 1958 New York Convention • Monist regime: applicable to both domestic and int’l arbitration • Though not perfect, by-and-large worked well--especially further to clarifications/support offered by SCC and CA • Arbitration community--who was not consulted--expected nothing more than a few fixes

  9. III. The proposed arbitration framework • The trouble with the draft bill • ***A complete (and useless) rewrite/restructuring of the provisions • An unacceptable broadening of the courts’ power to review arbitration award: « [...] the award is contrary to public order or would bring the administration of justice into disrepute » • Unexplainable omissions: e.g. Article 940.3 of current C.C.P. • Absurdities: e.g. Article 631 • Bottom line: arbitration less efficient, Quebec arbitration law moving away from internationally-accepted standards

  10. III. The proposed arbitration framework • Several worthy proposals • Confidentiality (Article 4) • Immunity of arbitrators (Article 608) • Default number of arbitrators: from three to one in domestic cases (Articles 625ff.) • Judicial review of arbitrators’ negative jurisdictional rulings (Article 633(2)) • Provisional and conservatory measures (Articles 631(2), 637, 644) • ***But: those changes don’t compensate for fundamental weaknesses

  11. III. The proposed arbitration framework • Why it matters • Efficient commercial arbitration fosters economic development • Promotes rule of law, lowers cost of doing business • Quebec’s untapped potential as a world-class int’l arbitration forum • Bilingualism, bijuridism, accessibillity, low cost of living, geo-political neutrality, reputation of excellence in the field... and world-class nightlife and restaurants ;)

More Related