IATSE, Local 262 (the “Union”) v. Laval Colossus Cinema and Ste-Foy Cineplex, Famous Players Limited Partnership (the “Employer”) (June 8, 2015)

In the course of interest arbitration between the parties, Union counsel advised Employer counsel and the board of arbitration that it might communicate with a witness after it had began but before it had concluded its examination in chief. The Employer objected and asked the board of arbitration: “does a lawyer that called a witness have an obligation not to communicate with the witness regarding a matter to which the witness will have to testify from the moment the witness is called to testify to the end of the testimony, whether in chief, in cross-examination, or in re-examination?”

The board of arbitration distinguished grievance arbitration and interest arbitration. Whereas the goal of grievance arbitration is to hear disputes in accordance with laws and the collective agreement, interest arbitrators determine the collective agreement to come. The board of arbitration held that this justifies the adoption of rules that correspond to the legal realties of interest arbitration.

The board of arbitration held that counsel for the Union and counsel for the Employer may communicate with a witness regarding any topic on which the witnesses has not yet been examined during the suspension of examination in chief, cross-examination or re-examination.

For Full Decision Click Here

English (Canada)