Originally from The Law and Practice of International Arbitration: Essays in Honor of John Fellas – Preview Page

ABSTRACT 

This essay reexamines the doctrine of manifest disregard of the law in the United States, with particular emphasis on the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in B.L. Harbert International, LLC v. Hercules Steel Co. The ruling is presented as a procedural turning point, highlighting the judiciary’s growing disapproval of attempts to undermine the finality of arbitral awards through baseless post-award litigation. 

Grounded in a doctrinal reassessment of Wilko v. Swan, Hall Street Associates v. Mattel, and Harbert, the essay examines the narrow legal standard governing the application of manifest disregard under U.S. law. It illustrates how federal courts have treated the doctrine, including their willingness to impose sanctions for frivolous petitions for vacatur that lack legal merit. The analysis distinguishes the application of the doctrine within the framework of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) from its relevance—or lack thereof—in enforcement proceedings governed by the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention). 

Finally, the essay provides practical guidance for foreign practitioners who may be concerned about whether arbitral awards rendered in the United States are vulnerable to annulment based on a common law doctrine that appears to diverge from the international arbitration consensus.