Arbitration is supposed to be an alternative to litigation, not a substitute. Subscribers are presumed to want to have their dispute resolved by a “private court” and a “private judge” they select and instruct to conduct the arbitration process under terms they mandate with as little judicial interference as possible. Does this mean that until an award is issued a court has no authority to supervise? Once the process is underway are the parties completely at the mercy of the arbitrator? If not, what rules govern if and when a court can be looked to for assistance?
Even though the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not mention a judicial power to supervise, some courts justify intervention to overturn procedural and substantive interim arbitral decisions, claiming authority in equity, i.e. to assure the fairness and efficiency of the arbitration process. This article looks at this approach. The takeaway is that while it is possible to enlist the assistance of a court, it isn’t easy to do so. This area of arbitration law is developing and evolving and warrants a watchful eye.
FAA and Judicial Intervention
This content has been archived.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]
