Background:
David M. Wiederhold sued his employer, Aspen Technology, Inc. and its subsidiary, Aspentech Canada Corporation, to recover $103,067.60 in unpaid bonuses and commissions under an incentive plan. The defendants sought to stay the action, claiming the dispute should be resolved by arbitration in Boston, as per their agreement.

Legal Issues:

1. Arbitration Agreement: The defendants argued that the case should go to arbitration based on a clause in the incentive plan, invoking section 7 of the Arbitration Act.
2. Plaintiff's Objection: Wiederhold contended that the arbitration clause was unenforceable due to lack of fresh consideration, violation of public policy, and unconscionability.

Court's Findings:

• Consideration: The court found that the arbitration clause, introduced after Wiederhold had started employment, lacked fresh consideration, rendering it unenforceable.
• Public Policy: The arbitration clause would circumvent British Columbia’s Employment Standards Act by depriving Wiederhold of statutory protections, including wages.
• Unconscionability: The court ruled the arbitration process was prohibitively expensive relative to the size of the claim, which would prevent effective resolution.

Outcome:
The court refused the defendants' application for a stay. The arbitration clause was declared void and inoperative. The court awarded David M. Wiederhold costs as the successful party.