AMISSAH J.A.
The defendant has asked this court to set aside an award made by the arbitrator, Mr. Jonathan Arthur, in this dispute which was referred to him. Counsel has argued on the defendant’s behalf that the arbitrator misconducted himself to his client’s prejudice in that the arbitrator wrongly construed what was in fact a tenancy agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant as a contract of employment. Thus consequences which flow from the one type of agreement but not from the other have been wrongly attributed to that other to the defendant’s detriment.
The arbitration arose out of an agreement whereby the defendant undertook to manage the plaintiff’s bakery. The plaintiff was described in the agreement as the employer and the defendant as the employee. There was the clause usual in service agreements that the employee shall devote his services exclusively to the management of the employer’s business. But there was another clause somewhat unusual in agreements of this kind…