Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Toward a New Federal Law on Arbitration$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Thomas E. Carbonneau

Print publication date: 2014

Print ISBN-13: 9780199965519

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: December 2014

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199965519.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 30 May 2020

The Possible Rebirth of “Hostility”

The Possible Rebirth of “Hostility”

Chapter:
(p.53) 3 The Possible Rebirth of “Hostility”
Source:
Toward a New Federal Law on Arbitration
Author(s):

Thomas E. Carbonneau

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199965519.003.0005

The Court's decisional law on arbitration is not free of ambivalence. There is a small group of cases in which the Court itself may have engaged in judicial hostility toward arbitration. Wilko v. Swan was the first decision in which the Court questioned the value of arbitration as an adjudicatory methodology. There, it allowed securities regulations to trump arbitral autonomy and depreciated the professional utility of arbitration. Alexander v. Gardner-Denver added civil rights to the list of possible limits on arbitrability, and Commonwealth Coatings required arbitrators to comply with legal standards regarding disclosures. When courts adjudged arbitrators partial, the award became an unenforceable nullity. Thereafter, Volt Information Sciences undermined federalization and Hall Street Associates removed the possibility of party control over vacatur. Finally, Stolt-Nielsen seemed to authorize judicial merits review of awards. Each of these decisions indicated that the Court was reconsidering its favorable position on arbitration.

Keywords:   decisional law, judicial hostility, arbitral autonomy, limits on arbitrability, disclosures, merits review, nullity, federalization, vacatur, legal standards

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .