IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA
Citation: Curtis, MacKinnon, Bonin & MacKinnon v. Burke, 2003 NSSC 248
Date: 20031217
Docket: SN 195936
Registry: Sydney
Between:
Brian Curtis, Anthony MacKinnon,
Paul Bonin and W. Francis MacKinnon
Appellants
v.
Osbourne Burke
Respondent
LIBRARY HEADING
Judge: The Honourable Justice Gerald R. P. Moir
Heard: 9 and 10 September 2003, in Sydney
Subjects: Arbitration, Appeal, Questions of Fact and Law, Discretion; Partnership, Agreement, Terms for Dissolution, Ambiguity; Partnership Act, termination under s. 29 (1); Partnership Act, judicial dissolution.
Summary: Four crab fishermen sought to dissolve a partnership of five. One term of their agreement spoke of termination by four out of the five. Another provided for unanimity to dissolve. Agreement provided for arbitration. Before the arbitrator, the four also argued that s. 29(1) provided for termination by any partner and that there should be judicial dissolution, a power assigned to the arbitrator. Arbitrator found for the other partner.
Issues: 1) How to resolve the ambiguity? 2) Whether s. 29(1) applied? 3) Grounds to interfere with discretion to dissolve.
Result: 1) Arbitrator correctly resolved the ambiguity in favour of unanimity. 2) Mose v. Elphick is good law in Nova Scotia. 3) No palpable and overriding error in fact finding, and discretion exercised judicially. Appeal dismissed.
THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION. QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.