A court will
not vacate an arbitration award simply because a court of law would have reached a different decision than the arbitrators.
Not exact matches
«[E] ven if an out - of - State attorney's representation of a party at an
arbitration proceeding in Massachusetts might constitute the practice of law, this conduct does
not provide a basis to
vacate the
arbitration award, and, as such, the plaintiffs are
not entitled to relief.»
On appeal to the SJC, the court said that, even if the lawyers» appearance had been unauthorized practice, that would
not provide a basis to
vacate the
arbitration award.
BG Group responded by saying the district and appellate courts assumed that the manifest disregard doctrine was a basis for
vacating arbitration awards, but then held that the tribunal in this case did
not manifestly disregard the law, rendering moot Argentina's bid for clarity on the issue.
On March 5, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal appeals court in Washington should
not have
vacated the
award, holding that nothing in the treaty overcame the normal assumption in US law that arbitrators rather than courts should decide disputes over the meaning of procedural conditions to
arbitration.
Federal appellate court reverses its earlier decision and determines that arbitrator's failure to disclose his minimal contact with prevailing party's attorney did
not require
vacating an
arbitration award.