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.

What you don't know can hurt you! Subscribe to stay informed.

Sign up now and receive an email when we publish new content.

We will never give away, trade or sell your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.