Proponents of arbitration typically laud its advantages of flexibility, efficiency and confidentiality. However, challenges to a nominated arbitrator can put these goals in conflict right from the arbitration’s inception. Perhaps to enable flexibility, many arbitral bodies’ procedural guidelines for challenges are not highly detailed. And perhaps to safeguard confidentiality, few arbitral bodies publish their arbitrator challenge decisions.
The result, however, is that arbitration participants have less information about whether their arbitrator choice may be subject to challenge; whether a prospective challenge is justified; what procedures (if any) are available to gather more information about an arbitrator; or what penalties (if any) exist for a party who abuses the process. As a result, disputes may arise on basic issues. And while most arbitrator selections and challenges are undoubtedly made in good faith, the lacuna of information yields a situation that is subject to abuse by overzealous participants.
This content has been archived.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]
