Can-Am Produce and Trading Ltd. v. Senator ( The )
T-2353-95
Hargrave P.
22/4/96
13 pp.
Motion by defendants to stay proceedings under Federal Court Act, s. 50-Plaintiffs receiving shipment of overripe, decaying mangoes-Bill of Lading providing contract governed by law of Argentina and disputes to be determined by courts in Buenos Aires and no other courts-Second clause in agreement providing disputes to be decided in country where carrier has principal place of business under its law-Seven entities defined as carriers by agreement-Plaintiff arguing conflict between two clauses confusing and should not be given effect or alternatively, clauses conferring concurrent jurisdiction-Defendant arguing no conflict and clauses should be read together-Defendant must prove applicability of jurisdiction clause-Burden of proof then shifting to plaintiff to show strong reasons why jurisdiction clause should not be enforced-Plaintiff claiming case has little connection with Argentina and substantial connection with Canada-Also claiming questionable what law would apply if case dealt with in Argentina-Not necessary to use word "exclusive" in jurisdiction clause to prevent it from being construed as concurrent jurisdiction provision-Possible to deal with absence of discovery of documents in Argentinean law by attaching terms to stay-That claim against stevedoring company for failing to keep container at proper temperature must be subject of separate action not sufficient reason to deny stay-Stay granted on terms-Defendants must not raise time bar issue in Argentinean proceedings and document production to be exchanged-Federal Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 50.