On what grounds can a court review an arbitration award?

Courts generally limit their review of an arbitration award to ensure the process remains a final resolution rather than the start of litigation. Judicial control is typically confined to specific grounds enumerated in arbitration statutes, rather than re-examining the arbitrator’s findings of fact or their application of the law.1

Grounds for court review often include:

• Procedural Misconduct: This includes instances where an arbitrator denies a party the opportunity to fully present their claim or refuses a request for a hearing postponement for good cause.1
• Lack of Impartiality: Challenges may be raised if an arbitrator lacked the necessary impartiality, though such claims are generally addressed only after an award has been rendered.1
• Public Policy Violations: Courts will deny the recognition and enforcement of an award if it is found to be contrary to public policy.1
• Jurisdictional Issues: Courts may review whether a valid arbitration agreement existed or if the specific controversy was actually covered by the agreement, as these issues determine the arbitrator’s authority to act.1