Can the Bears Challenge the Arbitral Award for Bias?

Question from Mark, Can the Bears Challenge the Arbitral Award for Bias?

Answer from AI:

When a party to an arbitration believes that the process was unfair, they may challenge the outcome in court. In the scenario involving the Awesome Football Club (AFC) and the Bears football team, the Bears have raised concerns about the impartiality and independence of the arbitrators. The English Commercial Court would consider such a challenge under the English Arbitration Act 1996, specifically looking at Section 68, which deals with challenging an award for serious irregularity affecting the tribunal, the proceedings, or the award.

Understanding Section 68 of the English Arbitration Act 1996

Section 68 provides a mechanism for challenging an arbitral award on the grounds of serious irregularity that has caused or will cause substantial injustice to the applicant. This section is intended to be used in exceptional cases where the due process has been breached. The court will not re-examine the merits of the case but will focus on the procedural aspects of the arbitration.

Assessing the Challenge for Impartiality and Independence

The Bears’ challenge is based on the argument that the arbitrators appointed from the AFC’s Panel may not be impartial or independent. The court would consider the following factors:

• Appointment Process: The court would examine the process by which the arbitrators were appointed. If the AFC had undue influence over the Panel or the appointment process lacked transparency, this could raise questions about the arbitrators’ independence.
• Selection Criteria: The absence of written policy or selection criteria for the Panel members could be problematic if it suggests a lack of objective standards for appointment.
• Security of Tenure: The Bears argue that the three-year renewable terms for Panel members create a subordinate relationship to AFC. The court would consider whether this arrangement could reasonably raise doubts about the arbitrators’ ability to act impartially.

Deciding on the Challenge

In deciding on the challenge, the court would apply the test of whether there is a real possibility that the tribunal was biased. This involves an objective assessment of whether a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was a real possibility of bias. The court would also consider whether any irregularity has caused substantial injustice to the Bears.

If the court finds that the appointment process was tainted by a lack of independence or impartiality, and this has led to substantial injustice, it may set aside the award. However, if the court concludes that the Bears’ allegations do not meet the high threshold set by Section 68, the award would likely be upheld.

Legal Advice and Further Steps

It is important for parties involved in such disputes to seek legal advice from professionals specializing in arbitration and sports law. Legal professionals can provide personalized advice based on the specifics of the case and represent the parties’ interests in court.

For more information on the English Arbitration Act 1996, you can visit the UK Legislation website.

In conclusion, the challenge to the arbitral award will depend on a careful judicial examination of the arbitrators’ appointment process and whether any perceived irregularities have led to substantial injustice. The Bears must demonstrate that the concerns raised are not merely theoretical but have had a practical impact on the fairness of the arbitration proceedings.