Before giving any of my views as seen through American eyes, it would be well, for better comprehension of my remarks, for me to explain first the fundamental differences between London and New York arbitration. First, it is generally the case in New York for arbitration to be conducted in accordance with the Arbitration Clause of the New York Produce Exchange Time Charter form. That is to say, from the very beginning a three-man panel is constituted and hears the case. The arbitrator selected by the other two arbitrators serves as Chairman of the Arbitration Panel and in no way is considered as an umpire.

All three arbitrators preserve their neutral judicial character at all times and unlike the case here at the point where two arbitrators disagree, in New York none of them ever acts as an advocate. It might occasion surprise to you to learn there are even cases where the arbitrators nominated by the litigants agree, but the Chairman does not and files a dissenting opinion.

When passing the U.S. Arbitration Act, it was the intention of Congress not only to lighten the load of the Court calendar by encouraging and regulating arbitration, but also, and more importantly, to leave to commercial experts in their field the right to decide cases on the basis of practical expertise rather than expose disputing parties in commercial cases to theoretical justice, and thus no Court review of arbitration is permitted as to findings of facts or applicable case law. The only exception is that arbitrators may not indulge themselves in “manifest disregard of the (Statute) Law”, to quote the U.S. Supreme Court. To give a rather simple and obvious example, arbitrators in New York may not disregard the U.S. Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, but may disregard decisions handed down by the Courts, and for that matter previous arbitrations also. The U.S. Arbitration Act restricts appeals against arbitration awards or petitions to vacate same, to cases of bias, prejudice or misconduct of the arbitrators or the like, but does not permit Court review on the facts or law.

The unpredictability of New York arbitration naturally follows, as arbitrators are not inhibited or restricted by previous Court decisions considered by them as being commercially unsound, and are given a completely free hand by the Courts as opposed to the system in operation in this country where arbitration, in a way, is an arm of the Courts. Whether