While it may be unethical for an arbitrator to not fully disclose his or her connections to an appointing side of an arbitration, discovering these connections later won’t guarantee that a less-than-ideal award will be vacated, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in an opinion Thursday.
In Certain Underwriting Members of Lloyd’s of London v. Insurance Company of the Americas, a panel composed of Circuit Judges Dennis Jacobs, Reena Raggi and Peter Hall reversed a district judge’s decision to vacate an arbitration award. The panel remanded the case, finding it appropriate to vacate an award on evident partiality grounds if the relationship “violates the contractual requirement of disinterestedness,” or if the arbitrator’s undisclosed relationships clearly affect the award.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
