Canada / 30 June 2004 / Canada, Supreme Court of British Columbia / Powerex Corp. v. Alcan Inc. / L030449
| Country | Canada |
| Court | Canada, Supreme Court of British Columbia |
| Date | 30 June 2004 |
| Parties | Powerex Corp. v. Alcan Inc. |
| Case number | L030449 |
| Applicable NYC Provisions | VI |
| Source |
2004 BCSC 876 | online: CanLII |
| Languages | English |
| Summary | Powerex Corp. ("Powerex") and Alcan Inc. ("Alcan") concluded a contract for the supply of power. Although Alcan contracted with a subcontractor, it remained fully liable for the performance of the contract limited to an amount of $100,000,000. When the subcontractor went bankrupt and Alcan was no longer able to perform its duties under the contract, Powerex commenced arbitration in Oregon, U.S., against Alcan and was awarded the maximum liability amount of $100,000,000. Alcan started annulment proceedings with a United States magistrate, then a Federal District Court judge in Oregon, and eventually at the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. At the same time, Powerex sought enforcement of the award in Canada before the Supreme Court of British Columbia. Alcan brought a motion to suspect the enforcement proceedings. The Supreme Court of British Columbia suspended the enforcement proceedings as long as the annulment proceedings were pending with the United States magistrate and the Federal District Court judge. It also decided to stay the enforcement proceedings while annulment proceedings were pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Court held that Alcan nonetheless had to make a security payment in the amount of $100,000,000, and that Powerex had the right to make use of this money as long as they provided security for the amount taken out of this trust. Alcan appealed this ruling to the British Columbia Court of Appeal, contending that the Supreme Court of British Columbia had exceeded its competence rooted in Article VI of the Foreign Arbitral Awards Act (which directly incorporates and whose wording is equivalent to Article VI NYC). |
| affirmed by : | |
| see also : |
Attachment (1)
 Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |
