Background:
In G & J Technologies Inc. v. James Bond, the plaintiffs, G & J Technologies Inc. and Gebhard Wager, sued James Bond, former CEO of Kelso Technologies Inc., alleging misrepresentations outside his role as CEO. The dispute stemmed from a technology development agreement (TDA) signed between G & J and Kelso to develop an off-road vehicle.

Legal Issues:
James Bond applied for a stay under section 7 of the Arbitration Act (S.B.C. 2020, c. 2), arguing the matter should be arbitrated based on the TDA's arbitration clause. The plaintiffs opposed, claiming Bond was not a party to the arbitration agreement. The key issues were:

• Did Bond have an arguable case as a non-signatory to the arbitration clause?
• Was Bond estopped from relying on the arbitration clause?

Court’s Decision:
The court found Bond presented an arguable case as Kelso's agent, making him a non-signatory party covered by the arbitration clause. The court held that arbitration should address the dispute under the “competence-competence” principle, staying the legal proceedings. The court rejected the estoppel argument, stating Bond’s inaction did not prevent him from invoking arbitration.

Outcome and Costs:
The court granted Bond’s application, staying the case in favor of arbitration. Bond was awarded costs at scale B, payable immediately by the plaintiffs. There was no monetary award since the matter was stayed for arbitration.