Clackson J in Lafarge Canada Inc. v Edmonton (City) 2012 ABQB 634 said a Statement of Claim “serves as a notice or as a commencing document, in compliance with s. 23 of the Arbitration Act.” He found “there is no reason why a Statement of Claim cannot also constitute compliance with s. 23.”
The Court of Appeal today allowed Edmonton’s appeal, saying “To characterize what amounts to the opposite of notice to commence arbitration as being the same as notice to commence arbitration would take s. 23 outside the scope of predictable meaning.” The court added that form is not important, but an intention to arbitrate must be “clear and unequivocal”.
See the Memorandum of Judgment here.