THE SUPREME COURT: AN ARBITRATOR MAY, IN CERTAIN CASES, PROVIDE AN OUTRIGHT RULING WITHOUT HOLDING ANY EVIDENTIARY HEARING OR FACTUAL INVESTIGATION

The applicant, who was a party to an arbitration agreement, filed a petition requesting the court to annul a ruling handed down by the arbitrator.  The applicant claimed that the lack of any evidentiary hearing or factual investigation during the arbitration proceedings provided sufficient grounds for the annulment of the arbitrator’s ruling.

 

The Israeli Supreme Court found that an arbitrator may provide an outright ruling without holding any evidentiary hearing or factual investigation, and that such a ruling may not be annulled by the court under the Arbitration Law on the grounds that: (a) the facts of the case were not in dispute, only the legal implication of such undisputed facts, (b) the parties had their fair opportunity to argue as to the legal implication of such undisputed facts, and (c) the parties did not explicitly limit the arbitrator from providing such a ruling within the arbitration agreement.

 
This Newsletter has been prepared by Y. Ben-Dror Law Offices for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This Newsletter is not intended to create and the receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon this Newsletter without seeking professional counsel. For further information concerning the above, please contact Yossi Ben-Dror.