Arbitration News

SUMMARYOF U.S. ARBITRATION LAW

The United States is a common law country. As a result, opinions of its courts also constitute law. Each year, the FAA is supplemented through the myriad court decisions interpreting it. This case law comes from three levels of federal courts: the United States Supreme Court, the appellate courts and the trial courts. The U.S. judiciary has established an unambiguous presumption in favor of arbitration, and it has encouraged the use of arbitration, particularly for disputes arising out of international commercial transactions.

The respect of U.S. courts for party autonomy in the arbitral process has been reinforced by a trilogy of U.S. Supreme Court decisions in 1995. As noted above, in the Terminix case, the Court held that the FAA applied to all contracts that in fact involved interstate commerce.In Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, the Court held that one must look to the intent of parties and the language of the arbitration clause in determining whether or not the parties intended to exclude any type of claims (in that case, a claim for punitive damages) from the scope of the arbitration clause.

SUMMARY OF U.S. ARBITRATION LAWThe Court noted that any such interpretation must be made in light of the federal policy requiring that disputes regarding the scope of arbitrable issues be resolved in favor of arbitration, which the Court held weighed against finding a restriction on the scope of the arbitrators' authority.In First Options of Chicago v. Kaplan, the Court held that one must also look to the arbitration clause to determine whether the parties have agreed to arbitrate any issue regarding the arbitrability of the dispute itself. The Court held that courts should not assume that the parties agreed to arbitrate arbitrability unless there is "clear and unmistakable" evidence that they did so. Otherwise, the issue should be determined by a court.

Contact our Tennessee Arbitration Lawyer Now!

	Did You Know?
	There are many advantages to arbitration. Parties often seek to resolve their disputes through arbitration because of a number of perceived potential advantages over judicial proceedings. Some advantages include, but are not limited to: (1) when the subject matter of the dispute is highly technical, arbitrators with an appropriate degree of expertise can be appointed, (2) arbitration is often faster and cheaper than litigation in court, (3) arbitral process enjoys a greater degree of flexibility than courts, and (4) arbitration awards are generally easier to enforce abroad than court judgments.