Courts haven't addressed the issue (in response to non-union employee claims) to same
extent as arbitrators.
Not exact matches
The
Arbitrator (i) shall apply internal laws of the State of New York consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act and applicable statutes of limitations, or, to the
extent (if any) that federal law prevails, shall apply the law of the U.S., irrespective of any conflict of law principles; (ii) shall entertain any motion to dismiss, motion to strike, motion for judgment on the pleadings, motion for complete or partial summary judgment, motion for summary adjudication, or any other dispositive motion consistent with New York or federal rules of procedure,
as applicable; (iii) shall honor claims of privilege recognized at law; and (iv) shall have authority to award any form of legal or equitable relief;
The parties agree that any and all controversies, disputes or claims arising out of or under this Agreement, shall be exclusively governed and decided by binding arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act in conformity with the Rules and Procedures
as established by the American Arbitration Association, and the determination of the
arbitrator shall be final and binding (except to the
extent there exist grounds for vacation of an award under applicable arbitration statutes).
Indeed, one might consider that a well - resourced defendant / respondent equipped with knowledge of the funding per se would be able to assess the
extent of its potential downside based on the broker's evidence
as to market pricing in Essar
as accepted by the
arbitrator (and implicitly by Waksman Q.C.).
The term «costs» includes only: (a) The fees of the arbitral tribunal to be stated separately
as to each
arbitrator; (b) The reasonable travel and other expenses incurred by the
arbitrators; (c) The reasonable costs of expert advice and of other assistance required by the arbitral tribunal; (d) The reasonable travel and other expenses of witnesses to the
extent such expenses are approved by the arbitral tribunal; (e) The legal and other costs incurred by the parties in relation to the arbitration to the
extent that the arbitral tribunal determines that the amount of such costs is reasonable; (f) The fees and expenses of the Secretariat, including the fees and expenses of the appointing authority.
«In short, this was a perfect storm of evidence to demonstrate the improper exercise of discretion of a selection committee so
as to allow the
arbitrator to find that their decision was both procedurally and substantively flawed to such an
extent that an
arbitrator could justifiably «gallop» over the selection panel's expertise and decision.»