Canada / 31 March 2003 / Canada, Cour d’appel du Québec / La Compagnie Nationale Air France v. Libyan Arab Airlines
| Country | Canada |
| Court | Canada, Cour d’appel du Québec |
| Date | 31 March 2003 |
| Parties | La Compagnie Nationale Air France v. Libyan Arab Airlines |
| Applicable NYC Provisions | II | II(3) |
| Source |
online: CanLII |
| Languages | English |
| Summary | Compagnie National Air France (“Air France”) and Libyan Arab Airlines (“LAA”) entered into a supply and maintenance agreement that included an arbitration clause referring to the arbitration regulations of the International Air Transport Association. A dispute arose regarding the performance of the contract and was submitted to arbitration. The parties agreed that the seat of arbitration would be Montreal and that the arbitration would be conducted in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission for International Commercial Law (“UNCITRAL Rules”). A tribunal issued a partial award dismissing Air France’s objections to jurisdiction based on the non-arbitrability of the dispute. Air France filed proceedings with the Cour supérieur du Québec (Quebec Superior Court) to annul the partial award. LAA filed a motion to dismiss the proceeding. The trial judge concluded that the issue of arbitrability could not be addressed except in the context of a motion to homologate or set aside an award. Air France appealed to the Cour d’appel du Québec (Quebec Court of Appeal) arguing, inter alia, that the arbitral tribunal had exceeded its jurisdiction and the partial award was against public policy. The Cour d’appel dismissed the appeal. It considered, inter alia, that arbitral tribunals enjoy a degree of autonomy, and unless an arbitration agreement is deemed invalid, state courts are obliged to decline jurisdiction over the dispute pursuant to Article II(3) NYC and other international instruments. The Cour d’appel also considered, without referring to the NYC, that Air France’s argument that the arbitral tribunal had not respected transnational public policy was unfounded. |
Attachment (2)
 Official Translation Adobe Acrobat PDF |
Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |
