Originally from American Review of International Arbitration - ARIA

Preview Page

The Supreme Court’s rulings declaring arbitrable claims under mandatory laws1 continue to create substantial problems.2 In particular, they raise the question to what extent the findings of arbitrators in cases involving such claims are reviewable by the courts. In Halligan v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.,3 the Second Circuit, per Judge Feinberg, directed vacatur of an arbitral award rejecting a claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) on the ground that “the arbitrators here manifestly disregarded the law or the evidence or both.”4 In so ruling, the Second Circuit not only gave renewed vigor to the dubious notion that willful disregard of the law justifies vacatur of an arbitral award, it also introduced a new ground: manifest disregard of the evidence.5