Citation: Broadband Communications North Inc v Date: 20180307 I-Netlink Incorporated, 2018 MBCA 24 Docket: AI17-30-08954 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA BETWEEN : BROADBAND COMMUNICATIONS ) C. R. MacArthur, Q.C. NORTH INC. ) for the Applicant ) (Applicant) Applicant ) G. A. McKinnon and ) M. C.

Ross - and - ) for the Respondent ) I-NETLINK INCORPORATED ) Chambers motion heard and ) Decision pronounced: (Respondent) Respondent ) March 7, 2018 BURNETT JA [ 1 ] In the Court below, each of the parties sought leave to appeal a final award of a single arbitrator pursuant to section 44(2) of The Arbitration Act , CCSM c A120. Leave to appeal was granted by the application judge to both parties for selected questions. [ 2 ] In the notice of motion filed in this Court (the motion), the applicant seeks leave to appeal the application judge’s decision (in relation to its application) pursuant to

section 48 of The Arbitration Act and sections 25 , 26 and 29 of The Court of Appeal Act , CCSM c C240. [ 3 ] At the hearing this morning, applicant’s counsel advised that it was no longer relying on

section 48 or any other provision of The Arbitration Act to provide jurisdiction for the motion; that the application judge did not decline jurisdiction; and that sections 25 , 26 and 29 of The Court of Appeal Act provide jurisdiction for the motion. [ 4 ] I have not been persuaded that sections 25, 26 and 29 authorize or permit a single judge, sitting in Chambers, to grant or deny leave to appeal the application judge’s decision.

Presumably if those sections provide jurisdiction, leave is not required. [ 5 ] In my view, given that the applicant is not relying on The Arbitration Act , the issue as to whether sections 25 , 26 and 29 provide jurisdiction must be decided if and when an appeal is taken from the application judge’s decision. [ 6 ] Given my conclusions with respect to jurisdiction, it is not necessary to decide whether the traditional criteria for granting leave have been met. [ 7 ] The motion for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent. JA