Originally from: AAA Handbook on Arbitration Practice

Preview Page

No one likes it when a party uses delaying tactics to stall the normal course of an arbitration, whether it is an ad hoc (i.e., self-administered) or an administered proceeding.  It is generally assumed that the respondent is the most likely party to seek to delay the arbitration, arguably because it would benefit from a postponement of the outcome. However, experience teaches that this is not the exclusive privilege of respondents. Claimants have reasons of their own to instigate delay. Since arbitration is a voluntary process created by the parties for their own benefit, there is little doubt that one or both parties can exert enough control over the process to slow it down. A party may have a variety of reasons for doing so.

Fortunately, delaying tactics are rarely abused to the point of totally defeating the arbitration process. There are several reasons for this. First, parties generally do not want to increase the costs of arbitration. Second, their attorneys know that lengthy delays may cause confusion and prevent the arbitrator from focusing on the crucial issues and facts of the case. Third, arbitrators have the power to minimize delay through effective management.2 Well-trained, experienced arbitrators are more likely to have the skills necessary to curb a party's inclination to delay the process. 

This chapter examines purposeful delaying tactics and when they are used. Then it addresses what arbitrators can do to minimize or eliminate these delays.