Digital Commons Network^™

The Case Against Maritime Class Arbitration: A Brief Policy Argument, Landon R. Schwob

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

On April 27, 2010, the United States Supreme Court decided a case that will have far-reaching implications for virtually all sectors within the arbitration industry, including the subject of this article-maritime arbitration. The question presented in Stolt-Nielsen v. AnimalFeeds International Corp. dealt with class arbitration and whether its imposition on parties whose arbitration clauses are silent on that issue is consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). This article will primarily examine the history and viability of class arbitration-and arbitration in general-in the far more narrow context of maritime and the admiralty. Stolt-Nielsen provides an excellent backdrop against which to …

Judicial Review Of International Commercial Arbitral Awards By National Courts In The United States And India, Aparna D. Jujjavarapu

LLM Theses and Essays

Article V of the New York convention lays down the provisions under which the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may be refused. The United States and India are signatories to the Convention. Section 10(a) of the Federal Arbitration Act in the United States limits the scope of judicial review of the arbitral awards to a clear list of grounds of vacatur. The national courts of the United States have recognized several non-statutory grounds of which "manifest disregard of the law" as a standard of review is the focus in this thesis. In fact, the state of Georgia has …

Keeping Arbitrations From Becoming Kangaroo Courts, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Arbitration has grown rapidly during the past 20 years. Particularly notable and problematic is the rapid onset of new or mass arbitration that has resulted from the judiciary's modern favorable attitude toward enforcement of arbitration clauses, even those imposed upon consumers, employees, small vendors, and debtors as part of a standardized contract of adhesion. In a separate article (See "Mandating Minimum Quality in Mass Arbitration," 76 U. Cin. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2007)), I present a more comprehensive list of what I regard as the necessary steps that must be taken to insure minimally acceptable quality and fairness in mass arbitration. …

On The Importance Of Institutions: Review Of Arbitral Awards For Legal Errors, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

In my view, legislatures, rather than courts or parties, should decide whether (and to what extent) courts should review arbitral awards for errors of law. The optimal legislative mechanism should not be compulsory but should offer parties the choice whether to "opt-in" to this regime of expanded review by inserting language to that effect in their arbitration agreement. A legislative solution with an "opt-in" feature has a sounder doctrinal foundation, better respects the distribution of power between various branches of government, involves a lower risk of error and minimizes transaction costs. From this position, two additional conclusions follow: first, courts …

Why Courts Review Arbitral Awards, William W. Park

Faculty Scholarship

Judicial review of arbitral awards constitutes a form of risk management. In most countries courts may vacate decisions of perverse arbitrators who have ignored basic procedural fairness, as well as those of alleged arbitrators who have attempted to resolve matters never properly submitted to their jurisdiction. In some countries judges may also correct legal error or monitor an award's consistency with public policy.

Public scrutiny of arbitration is inevitable at the time of award recognition. Judges can hardly ignore the basic fairness of an arbitral proceeding when asked to give an award res judicata effect by seizing assets or staying …

Nova Scotia (Minister Of Education & Culture) V Nstu, Innis Christie

Innis Christie Collection

Supplementary award with respect to a Union grievance dated April 23, 1998, alleging breach Article 43.01 and Schedules D1, D2, D3 and D4 of the Collective Agreement between the Minister and the Union made February 3, 1998 for the term November 1, 1997-October 31, 1999 in that all school boards in Nova Scotia have refused to pay at the salary levels set out in the Schedules following the end of the effect of the Public Sector Compensation (1994-97) Act on October 31, 1997. The parties agreed that the Halifax Regional School Board would be used as an example …

Enforcement Of Collective Bargaining Orders In The Third Circuit: The Rise And Fall Of The Armcor Standards, Louis A. Minella

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.