Good Policy or Judicial Abdication: When Courts Uphold Arbitral Awards Which Are in Excess of the Arbitrator's Jurisdiction - Hall v. Superior Court

Authors

Sharon E. Schulte

Abstract

Legislatures and the court system have advanced a strong policy to encourage individuals to arbitrate disputes and avoid the traditional judicial system. 2 In order to promote this policy, it is vital that arbitrators' awards be respected and upheld if at all possible. Consequently, the grounds for review of arbitration awards are limited.' One of the grounds available for vacating an arbitral decision arises when an arbitrator exceeds his or her jurisdiction by purporting to decide issues not submitted by the parties for arbitral determination. 4 This Note discusses the potential consequences to the overall policy goals of encouraging arbitration when reviewing courts fail to vacate arbitration awards which purport to decide issues outside of the arbitrator's jurisdiction.

Recommended Citation

Sharon E. Schulte, Good Policy or Judicial Abdication: When Courts Uphold Arbitral Awards Which Are in Excess of the Arbitrator's Jurisdiction - Hall v. Superior Court, 1994 J. Disp. Resol. (1994)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol1994/iss1/15