A recent line of cases has highlighted the differing views in Canada on the standard of review that applies on an appeal from an arbitral award on a question of law.
The Court of Appeal for the Northwest Territories, in Northland Utilities (NWT) Limited v Hay River (Town of), 2021 NWTCA 1, held that the standard is correctness. The Manitoba Court of Appeal, however, in Buffalo Point First Nation v Buffalo Point Cottage Owners Association Inc., 2025 MBCA 72, held that the reasonableness standard set out in Sattva Capital Corp. v Creston Moly Corp., 2014 SCC 53, and Teal Cedar Products Ltd. v British Columbia, 2017 SCC 32, applies to questions of law, unless the question is one that would attract the correctness standard, such as a constitutional or jurisdictional question.
More recently, in Vancouver School District No. 39 v Kingsgate Property Ltd., 2026 BCCA 98, the Court held that the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65, applies to statutory appeals of arbitral awards on questions of law, with the result that a correctness standard applies.
This is a significant issue for parties to arbitration. It affects the deference given to arbitral awards and the finality of arbitral proceedings. Given its importance, and the divergence in approach among the various Courts of Appeal, it is increasingly likely that the question will return to the Supreme Court of Canada for further clarification.