Arbitrators who serve in class arbitrations should accomplish the unique procedural and substantive objectives of class actions while providing the efficiencies expected of arbitration proceedings.

I. ACCEPTING AN APPOINTMENT TO SERVE AS AN ARBITRATOR IN A CLASS ARBITRATION

Arbitrators should not accept an appointment to serve in class proceedings unless they believe they are sufficiently qualified to manage all procedural steps through the issuance of a final award.

Class arbitration is a new and rapidly evolving procedure. By the time this edition of the Guide goes to print, new court decisions and/or new institutional rules may affect the general considerations discussed below. Arbitrators serving in a class arbitration must be not only familiar with the evolving case law but also alert to changes in institutional rules that might govern or provide guidance on how the arbitration should be conducted. Two major arbitral institutions—the AAA and JAMS—have established procedures that apply in class arbitrations conducted under their rules. See JAMS Class Action Procedures (JAMS Class Arbitration Rules); AAA Supplementary Rules for Class Arbitrations (AAA Class Arbitration Rules). Given the relative absence of guidance concerning how class arbitrations should be conducted, arbitrators serving in class arbitrations should be conversant with these procedures even if their arbitration is ad hoc or administered by other arbitral institutions. Indeed, although the AAA Class Arbitration Rules were not drafted in a manner contemplated to be used in ad hoc proceedings, they apparently have been adopted for use in at least some ad hoc arbitrations. See, e.g., Stolt-Nielsen v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp., 548 F.3d 85, 88 (2d Cir. 2008), rev'd on other grounds, 130 S. Ct. 1758 (2010); In re Wood, 140 S.W.3d 367,368 (Tex. 2004).