Background:
Creative Energy Vancouver Platforms Inc. appealed an arbitration award that interpreted a contractual clause regarding the calculation of Floor Space Ratio (FSR) for a real estate transaction. The dispute centered on the “Triangle” property, which Creative Energy had the option to purchase from Concord Pacific Developments Ltd. under an agreement that required payment for excess density.

Legal Issues & Arguments:

• Creative Energy’s Argument: The arbitration panel erred by allowing the factual matrix to override the contract's wording, effectively rewriting the agreement. It contended that the FSR should have been based solely on the physical Triangle property (1.36 FSR).
• Concord Pacific’s Argument: The contract referred to the zoning laws of Vancouver, which defined FSR by the entire site, not just the Triangle. The panel correctly applied this interpretation, resulting in an FSR of 8.96.

Court's Decision:
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the arbitration panel correctly applied contract interpretation principles and did not commit an extricable legal error.

Award & Costs:
The arbitration panel ruled in favor of Concord Pacific Developments Ltd., determining that the applicable FSR was 8.96. The judgment did not specify the exact financial award, but the decision upheld the arbitration ruling, meaning Creative Energy was liable for paying fair market value for excess density.