Law360 Canada ( January 27, 2025, 9:23 AM EST) -- Appeal by Husky Oil Operations Limited (Husky) from chambers judge’s (judge) decision striking its warranty claims against Technip Stone & Webster Process Technology, Inc. and Technip USA, Inc. (Technip); cross- appeal by Technip from judge’s decision that Husky’s negligence claims must proceed. Husky filed a statement of claim against its equipment suppliers, Technip, alleging breach of warranties and negligence in manufacture. The judge interpreted the contract between Technip and Husky’s general contractor, Snamprogetti Canada Inc. (Snamprogetti). The contract provided that Husky could enforce warranty claims directly against Technip. It also contained a dispute resolution provision culminating in a mandatory arbitration clause. The judge concluded the warranty dispute had to proceed to arbitration. He struck those claims but allowed the negligence claims to proceed. On appeal, Husky argued in part, that the judge erred in finding that the arbitration provision in the contract applied to it and determining that it agreed to arbitrate its warranty claims. Technip cross-appealed, arguing that the negligence claims must also proceed by arbitration and should have been struck as well. It further argued that because the judge found Husky was a party to the arbitration agreement, he erred in failing to further find that the negligence claims were also subject to mandatory arbitration....