In Spinney v. Fowlie, 2025 ONSC 2632, the Ontario Superior Court set aside an arbitration award issued by Arbitrator, Richard W. Pound. The applicants, wrestling coaches David Spinney and Ahmed Shamiyah, had been found to have harassed a former Wrestling Canada official, Dr. Frank Fowlie, and challenged the fairness of the arbitration process.
Key Findings by Hackland J.:
- Unequal Treatment in Hearing Process:
- The arbitrator allowed Fowlie to present live testimony and cross-examine witnesses but required the applicants to submit their evidence in writing without cross-examination.
- This violated section 19(1) of the Arbitration Act, 1991, which guarantees equal and fair treatment.
- It also ignored section 26(1), which mandates a hearing if requested, and contradicted the applicable arbitration rules that favor teleconference hearings unless parties agree otherwise.
- Failure to Consider Submissions:
- The arbitrator further breached procedural fairness in ignoring the applicants’ closing submissions.
- The applicants refused to engage with the arbitrator’s in-writing only evidentiary procedure. However, they did file argument on the arbitrator’s jurisdiction and the legal test to be applied.
- Hackland J. found that the arbitrator had wrongly refused to consider these submissions simply because the applicants did not file written evidence.
Important Note by the Court:
Hackland J. acknowledged the arbitrator’s concerns about delay tactics by the applicants but emphasized that procedural fairness must still be upheld despite a party’s conduct. He stated, “[…] it is well established that the fairness and equality of treatment standard must be adhered to in spite of a party’s conduct during an arbitral proceeding.”
Conclusion:
The arbitration award was set aside due to serious breaches of procedural fairness and unequal treatment, reaffirming the principle that all parties are entitled to a fair opportunity to present and defend their case—even if their behaviour during proceedings is questionable.