The parties agree that a court’s jurisdiction to try a matter is displaced where the difference between the parties arise from a collective agreement. As was said in Weber v. Hydro, 1995 CanLII 108 (SCC), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 929, the “question in each case is whether the dispute, viewed with an eye to its essential character, arises from a collective agreement” (at para. 67). As stated at para. 52: In the majority of cases the nature of the dispute will be clear; either it had to do with the collective agreement or it did not. Some cases, however, may be less than obvious. The question in each case is whether the dispute, in its essential character, arises from the interpretation, application, administration or violation of the collective agreement.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.