Arbitrators from time to time encounter situations in which it is apparent (or they suspect) that the parties have agreed in advance on the outcome of a submission, and merely want the arbitrator to give their agreement the dignity of an award.
What is the honest arbitrator to do in such a situation? Should he lend his office to the convenience of the parties and issue as his decision what is really a compromise of the parties? Or should he withdraw from the case, allowing the parties to find a more willing rubber stamp? If a more compliant arbitrator can not be found, the parties may have to achieve the same result by hiding their agreement from the new arbitrator and presenting their respective cases in such a manner that the result they seek is inevitable. Or, finally, should the arbitrator who suspects he has an "agreed" case decide it according to his own lights, on the merits, despite the defects in presentation resulting from the parties' attitudes, and reach (perhaps) a conclusion sought by neither party?