Following is a press release by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC): The ICC World Council has named 12 new vice presidents and 41 new members to the ICC International Court of Arbitration. The new appointments bring the total number of Court members to 125. The ICC World Council made the appointments at its meeting in Kuala Lumpur on the occasion of the ICC World Chambers Federation Congress in Malaysia. In addition to the new appointments, the World Council renewed the terms of 56 other members and 12 alternates. Court members serve three-year terms. The Court will have 125 members from 86 countries when its new term begins 1 July. “The appointments of the new vice presidents in particular reflect the global reach of ICC arbitration, the diversity of its users and the continuing ability of the ICC Court to attract both well-known names and rising stars to join it,” Court Chairman John Beechey said. The Court’s workload has been growing rapidly during the past several years, with the number of cases registered jumping to 663 last year from 599 in 2007. In addition 407 awards were rendered in 2008, compared with 349 in 2007, while there were 1,317 cases pending compared with 1,285 at the end of the previous year. We wonder if this signals the expansion of the international arbitration practice? Let us know what you think! The full announcement is here: New ICC Arbitration Court Members Named, ICC, Paris, June 9 2009.

In response to our post about an article titled “Arbitration Myths” published by the National Arbitration Forum, U.S. District Judge W. Royal Furgeson, Jr. sent us the following [unedited] commentary via e-mail: Dear Friends: To say that arbitration awards are “approved” by a court before becoming enforceable gives the impression that a court will actually examine the merits of the arbitrator’s award. Under the Federal Arbitration Act and the case law interpreting the Act, a court does not have the authority to review an arbitration award in the same way as an appellate court would. In fact, in many instances, the arbitrator is not even required to explain the reasons for the award, so no substantive review is possible. Instead, the court’s limited function is to basically insure that the arbitrator has had no conflict and that no fraud has occurred. Therefore, as a practical matter, the arbitrator can be wrong on the facts and the law and the award still must be enforced by the court so long as there is no conflict and no fraud. Simply stated, court approval does not involve an investigation into the merits of the award. One very important criticism of arbitration is that there is no real opportunity to have an award reviewed through an appellate process, which is important to understand. Sincerely, Royal Furgeson Technorati Tags: law, ADR, arbitration

Yesterday, NPR had an interesting article about the controversial issue of mandatory arbitration of claims between businesses and individuals (employees and consumers). First, the article discusses the unfortunate story of a young woman who was allegedly raped by several men while working in Iraq for Halliburton. At issue in her case ( Jones v. Halliburton ) is a motion to compel arbitration of her tort claims filed by Halliburton. The case remains under appeal in the Fifth Circuit (we blogged about it here). The article also mentions comments made by Elizabeth Bartholet, Harvard law professor and former arbitrator at the National Arbitration Forum (NAF), one of the country’s largest arbitration firms. Bartholet claims that she was removed from her job at NAF because she ruled against a credit card company in one case. On a related note, former NAF manager Deanna Richert filed a discrimination lawsuit against NAF recently. In the suit, she alleges that NAF regularly favored business clients. See Wall Street Journal article : Did the National Arbitration Forum Pander To ‘Famous Parties’? and read the National Arbitration Forum’s Answer. Finally, the article mentions the “Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009″ which is federal legislation currently pending in Congress that would ban mandatory arbitration of employment, consumer, and franchisee claims. Link to the Senate Version: S. 931 and link to Status. Link to the House Version: H.R. 1020 and link to Status. Here is the full NPR article: Rape Case Highlights Arbitration Debate, Wade Goodwyn, June 9, 2009. Previous Coverage: Texas Bar Journal Article: The Future of Arbitration (May 13) U.S. Senate Introduces Its Own Version of the Arbitration Fairness Act (May 7) Myths of Consumer Protection Law (May 4) Arbitration Fairness Act: Analysis (April 29) Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum Guest Post: Rectifying a Critical Flaw in the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009 (April 27) Arbitration Fairness Day: Follow Up (April 24) April 29: Arbitration Fairness Day (April 23)

[update: see Commentary by Federal Judge about this article here] Ever wonder what are the most common myths about the arbitration process? Below is a discussion of five misconceptions about arbitration from an article by the National Arbitration Forum Blog: Arbitration costs more than court – In most consumer cases filing fees in arbitration are significantly less expensive than the filing fees required in many trial courts. Arbitration filing fees for consumer claimants at the National Arbitration Forum, for instance, are low. They start at $19 for smaller claims. Moreover, individual parties can choose to proceed in arbitration without the need to engage or pay an attorney. The arbitration process is no quicker than litigation – To arbitrate or to litigate, that is the question. Many people advocate for litigation saying it is quicker than arbitration. This simply is not true. The arbitration process is speedy. Analysis of arbitration involving consumer contracts shows a median case duration of four to six months whereas the Bureau of Justice Statistics shows that contract lawsuits last a median length of 15 to 20 months. Arbitration is nothing more than a “kangaroo court” – Inaccurate reports liken arbitration to sham legal proceedings that deny rights in the name of expediency. While it is true that the arbitration process is timely, it is not true that due process rights are forfeited. Arbitration, as conducted by leading organizations such as the National Arbitration Forum, requires arbitrators to follow the same laws that judges in court cases follow. And, arbitration decisions are approved by a court judge before becoming a legally-enforceable judgment. Businesses win more than consumers in arbitration – Have you ever heard that arbitration is better for businesses than everyday consumers? Not true. One of the most important benefits of arbitration, a faster, lower cost, and superior alternative to litigation, is that it strives to provide parties with the same outcomes they would have received in court. Studies show that arbitration outcomes are the same or even marginally better for consumers than litigation outcomes. This means that consumers get a fair shake in arbitration. No one seems to like or even understand arbitration – Unfortunately this is far from the truth. Surveys of American consumers, lawyers, and courts show that they consistently and resoundingly acknowledge arbitration. One former arbitration participant said, “I would most recommend the arbitration process for both friends and family in order to get a fair hearing and decision. I would like others to know my experience in order to create awareness of arbitration in this society where justice is sometimes prevented.” Any thoughts? Technorati Tags: law, ADR, arbitration