No Time Extensions for Arbitration Appeals: BC Court of Appeal Reaffirms Limits on its Authority
In Math4Me Learning Inc. v 1099615 B.C., 2024 BCCA 369, the BC Court of Appeal refused to grant an extension of time and leave to appeal an arbitration award under section 59 of the Arbitration Act, SBC 2020, c 2 for want of jurisdiction. Absent explicit statutory authority in the Arbitration Act (which no longer exists), the BC Court of Appeal held that it cannot grant an extension of time to appeal an arbitration award.
Background
Math4Me Learning is a tutoring company that provides math and other educational services, founded by Mr. Ivneet Bains. The three respondents, a numbered company, Nainee Grewal and Harsh Grewal, had three licensing or franchise agreements with Math4Me. Each of these agreements contained an arbitration clause.
A dispute arose and the parties proceeded to arbitration. The Arbitrator released his decision in December 2023, ruling in favour of the respondents. However, the release of the Arbitrator’s decision was delayed because Math4Me had not paid their share of the arbitration fees. Math4Me alleged that the Arbitrator had changed his decision, from being favourable to Math4Me to being favourable to the respondents, because Math4Me did not pay his fee.
The respondents sought to recognize and enforce the arbitration award in the BC Supreme Court, under s. 61 of the Arbitration Act. In their response filed on March 18, 2024, Math4Me stated that they intended to appeal the arbitration decision under s. 59 of the Arbitration Act.
It was not until June 28, 2024 that Math4Me finally filed sought leave to appeal the arbitration award. As the deadline for seeking leave to appeal of an arbitration award is 30 days after the date the applicant receives the arbitral award (pursuant to s. 60(1) of the Arbitration Act), Math4Me also asked for an extension of time to file their leave to appeal application. The application for an extension of time and for leave to appeal were scheduled for November 22, 2024 – nearly a year after the Arbitrator’s decision was released.
BC Court of Appeal Decision
The respondents applied to the Court of Appeal to dismiss the application to extend time and for leave to appeal. They argued that the appeal had to be dismissed because the Court had no ability to extend the time to file an appeal under the Arbitration Act.
The appellant sought to have everything adjourned to November 22, 2024 to give them more time to bring forward evidence of alleged fraud on the part of the Arbitrator and lawyers.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the respondents, finding that it did not have the jurisdiction to extend the time period for seeking leave to appeal under the Arbitration Act beyond the 30-day time limit found in section 60(1). The Court dismissed the application for an extension of time.
The Arbitration Act does not provide the Court of Appeal with any authority to extend time limits to file an appeal or an application for leave to appeal. Extending the time limits for an appeal that is statutory in nature – like in this case – is not part the Court’s inherent jurisdiction. Therefore, once the 30-day appeal period in s. 60 of the Arbitration Act has expired, the Court cannot grant an extension.
Key Takeaways
The decision in Math4Me highlights the difficulties and limitations to appealing an arbitration award.
1. Strict enforcement of time limits under the Arbitration Act
Parties seeking to appeal an arbitration award or to apply to have it set aside must file an application within 30 days of receiving the award, as the Court has no authority to extend this deadline.
The Arbitration Act requires that an application be brought within 30 days for both appeals under s. 59 and applications to set aside arbitral awards under s. 58. The only exception to the 30 day deadline is for allegations of fraud under s. 58. In that situation, the 30-day deadline commences on the date the applicant first knew (or reasonably ought to have known) of the fraud.
2. Clear legislative authority is needed for Courts to interfere with arbitration proceedings
Although the old Arbitration Act (which was replaced with the current Arbitration Act in 2020) permitted the Court to extend any time limit provided for in the Arbitration Act, since 2020, British Columbia’s arbitration laws have limited the Court’s ability to interfere with or review arbitration decisions. This decision provides an example of how BC’s arbitration legislation is in-line with international standards set out in the UNCITRAL Model Law, which have already been largely adopted throughout the country including in BC’s International Commercial Arbitration Act, RSBC 1996, c 233.
Without clear legislative authority, the Court cannot modify procedural rules established in the Arbitration Act.
3. Importance of procedural compliance in arbitrations
Parties must be vigilant about complying with deadlines and other statutory procedures when engaging in arbitration. Because Courts have no inherent jurisdiction to modify procedural rules established in the Arbitration Act, the failure to adhere to procedural requirements, such as filing deadlines, can result in a loss of the ability to appeal or apply for the order to be set aside.
This decision is a testament to the strength of arbitration as a definitive and efficient means of dispute resolution, and to the importance of adhering to the limitations set by the Arbitration Act.
Case Information
Math4Me Learning Inc. v 1099615 B.C., 2024 BCCA 369
Docket: CA49976
Date of Decision: October 31, 2024