Links from this article:
Read the article here.

A municipality was served with a notice of arbitration disputing the valuation of expropriated land 5 years after the expropriation, because there was no time limit on the ability to file a notice. Parties may wish to consider any time limitations applicable both during and after the termination of the contract.

The City of Woodstock Ontario expropriated land in 2002, was served with a notice of arbitration challenging the valuation of the land expropriated in 2007, and paid a settlement in the matter in 2014. Because of the delays, the interest charges on the increased value exceeded the original valuation. The applicable legislation had no time limit on filing a notice of arbitration.

Read the article here.

Take away:

  • Arbitration agreements should specify clear time limits on the service of a notice of arbitration.


–  –  –

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader’s own risk. is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find where you see this logo.