Stodgy Blog: Home | About

September 11, 2021

Arbitration Agreement Void

Filed under: Uncategorized — Chris Chaten @ 8:53 AM

[A]s, for example, where the arbitral award has been set aside or there is an impasse in the vote of the arbitrators or the arbitral award has not been rendered within the prescribed time limit. In addition, it proposes that a settlement reached before the commencement of arbitration may render the arbitration agreement inoperative, although it takes note of a U.S. decision leaving this matter to the arbitrators. As you know, section 9(1) of the Arbitration Act 1996 provides that a court suspends its proceedings in respect of a case in which the parties have agreed that it will be submitted to arbitration. Under Article 9(4), however, the obligation to suspend the Tribunal is to be waived if the Tribunal is satisfied that `the arbitration agreement is void, inoperative or unenforceable`. In many cases, there will be a dispute over the validity or extent of the arbitration clause, and the question that will then arise is whether, in the exercise of its inherent jurisdiction, the English court should order a stay so that the matter can be settled by the arbitrators, or refuse a stay and deal with the matter itself. so that questions s9 can be decided in court. The latter approach is almost always adopted, and another example is the recent decision of Christopher Clarke J in JSC BTA Bank against Ablyazov and Ors [2011] EWHC 587 (Comm). The arbitration agreement in question claimed to support MMA`s arbitration rules, but with carve-outs that brought considerable benefits to doctors. As a result, while patients have surrendered their right to a jury trial by agreeing to arbitrate, they have not received the benefits that, in return, have been prejudiced by the legal system.

For example,(1) the MMA required the physician to grant liability in exchange for a $250,000 cap for non-economic damages, but the agreement imposed the cap on uninsecured damages; and (2) MMA required a panel of three independent arbitrators, one of whom must be an administrative judge, but the agreement did not require independent arbitrators and instead allowed each party to appoint an arbitrator (the arbitrators appointed by the party appointing the panel chair) and if the patient did not appoint an arbitrator within twenty days; the physician was in fact empowered to appoint a majority of arbitrators….

No Comments

No comments yet.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.