Consumer Arbitration After Seidel v. TELUS
(2011) 51(2) Can. Bus. L.J. 187-210
published: 2011 | Research publication | Journal
For the third time in three years the Supreme Court of Canada has weighed in on the consumer arbitration debate and added yet another layer of uncertainty to an already complicated legal landscape. Post Seidel, the availability of collective redress and consumer protection depends on the explicit and implicit legislative intent of the provincial legislation governing the dispute and common law arguments of unconscionability are not relevant. This paper examines the majority and minority opinions in Seidel v. TELUS Communications Inc., and comments on the implications for Canadian consumers.
revised May 18/11
View all Shelley McGill documents