What's happening
This bill requires arbitrators in New York to disclose any conflicts of interest and ensures arbitration panels are neutral third parties.
Why it matters
Strengthens trust in arbitration. by requiring arbitrators to proactively disclose any financial or personal ties to the case or its parties, reducing the risk of hidden biases that could unfairly influence the outcome.
Limits parties’ ability to waive neutrality requirements. before a dispute arises, ensuring that all arbitration panels are impartial and not hand-picked by one side, even if a contract tries to dictate otherwise.
Gives parties a clear avenue to challenge arbitration awards. if they discover undisclosed conflicts of interest, making it easier to hold arbitrators accountable and potentially overturn biased decisions.
Raises the standards for arbitration organizations. by making it illegal for contracts to mandate the use of arbitrators or organizations that are not neutral third parties, directly targeting concerns about “repeat player” bias in the arbitration industry.
Albany, before your first meeting.
Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.
Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.
Who cares
Headline styles
Ban Biased Arbitrators
Plain English, a few words. Used as the page title.
Sponsors
Senator · Senate District 32
No co-sponsors yet.
History
- Referred to judiciary
- Referred to judiciary
Companion bill
The same bill in the other chamber. A bill becomes law when one version passes both houses and the governor signs it, so either number can carry it.
Ban Biased Arbitrators
Assembly Floor Calendar · Sponsor Jeffrey Dinowitz
Full text
2 pagesUnderlined is new[Struck] is removedOfficial text on nysenate.gov ↗
STATE OF NEW YORK
5669
2019-2020 Regular Sessions
IN SENATE
May 10, 2019
Introduced by Sen. SEPULVEDA -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Judiciary
AN ACT to amend the civil practice law and rules, in relation to grounds for vacating an arbitration award on the basis of partiality of the arbitrator
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. Article 75 of the civil practice law and rules is amended by adding a new section 7500 to read as follows:
§ 7500. Definitions. As used in this article:
(a) "Arbitration" means a form of dispute resolution that is an alternative to litigation, in which the parties agree to be bound by the determination of a neutral third party arbitrator.
(b) "Neutral third party arbitrator" means an arbitrator or panel of arbitrators each of whom does not have an undisclosed known, direct, and material interest in the outcome of the arbitration proceeding or a known, existing, and substantial relationship with a party, counsel, or representative of a party.
§ 2. Section 7501 of the civil practice law and rules, as amended by chapter 532 of the laws of 1963, is amended to read as follows:
§ 7501. Effect of arbitration agreement. A written agreement to submit any controversy thereafter arising or any existing controversy to arbitration is enforceable without regard to the justiciable character of the controversy and confers jurisdiction on the courts of the state to enforce it and to enter judgment on an award; provided, however, that any language requiring the controversy be submitted to an arbitrator or arbitration organization that is not a neutral third party arbitrator, as that term is defined in subdivision (b) of section seventy-five hundred of this article, shall be deemed void; provided that it shall be valid with respect to the requirement that the controversy be arbitrated. The requirement that the controversy be heard by a neutral third
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD07683-01-9
S. 5669 2
party arbitrator may not be waived by party prior to the service on such party of a demand for arbitration. Upon disclosure pursuant to section seventy-five hundred five-a of this article of a known, direct, and material interest in the outcome of the arbitration proceeding or a known existing and substantial relationship with a party, counsel, or representative of a party, a party shall be deemed to have waived any objection to the arbitrator or composition of any arbitration panel, by failing to raise same prior to the commencement of the arbitration hearing. In determining any matter arising under this article, the court shall not consider whether the claim with respect to which arbitration is sought is tenable, or otherwise pass upon the merits of the dispute.
§ 3. The civil practice law and rules is amended by adding a new section 7505-a to read as follows:
§ 7505-a. Disclosure by arbitrator. (a) Before accepting appointment, an individual who is requested to serve as an arbitrator, after making a reasonable inquiry, shall disclose to all parties to the agreement to arbitrate and the arbitration proceeding and to any other arbitrators any known facts that a reasonable person would consider likely to affect the impartiality of the arbitrator in the arbitration proceeding, including:
(1) a financial or personal interest in the outcome of the arbitration proceeding; and
(2) an existing or past relationship with any of the parties to the agreement to arbitrate or the arbitration proceeding, their counsel or representatives, a witness, or another arbitrator.
(b) An arbitrator has a continuing obligation to disclose to all parties to the agreement to arbitrate and the arbitration proceeding and to any other arbitrators any facts that the arbitrator learns after accepting appointment which a reasonable person would consider likely to affect the impartiality of the arbitrator.
(c) If an arbitrator discloses a fact required by subdivision (a) or (b) of this section to be disclosed and a party timely objects to the appointment or continued service of the arbitrator based upon the fact disclosed, the objection may be a ground for vacating an award made by the arbitrator.
(d) If the arbitrator did not disclose a fact as required by subdivision (a) or (b) of this section, upon timely objection by a party, the court may vacate an award.
(e) An arbitrator appointed as a neutral arbitrator who does not disclose a known, direct, and material interest in the outcome of the arbitration proceeding or a known, existing, and substantial relationship with a party is presumed to act with evident partiality.
§ 4. This act shall take effect immediately.
Reflowed for reading: line numbers and page breaks removed. Cite the official text.
Sponsor's memo
Title of bill
An act to amend the civil practice law and rules, in relation to grounds for vacating an arbitration award on the basis of partiality of the arbitrator
Purpose or general idea of bill
To clarify the intent and protect the purpose of the existing laws regarding arbitration by creating a definition of the term arbitration
Summary of provisions
Amends Article 75 Civil Practice Law and Rules by adding a provision to subdivision (b)(ii) of Section 7511 which adds the fact that an arbitra- tor has been affiliated with any party or has a direct or indirect financial interest in any party or in the outcome of the arbitration, as grounds to vacate an arbitration award.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ORIGINAL AND AMENDED VERSION (IF APPLICABLE): N/A
Justification
The public policy in favor of arbitration which is codified in Section 7501 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules, is based upon the fact that arbitration can be a more efficient and cost-effective method for parties to resolve disputes. The presumption that an arbitration clause is enforceable has, however, become a sword to wield against parties of lesser means rather than a shield to protect against unnecessary liti- gation. Currently, a party must prove, either during the course of misconduct by the arbitrator or after an award by an arbitrator is perceived to be unfair, that the arbitrator was biased even if the arbi- trator clearly has an economic stake in the outcome of the dispute. This outcome is in direct opposition to the reasons (efficiency and fairness) why arbitration is favored. As arbitration is commonly thought to be a dispute resolution procedure that occurs in front of a neutral third party, codifying it as such will enforce the original intent of the law.
Prior legislative history
(2011-2012) A7002-C Amend and recommit to judiciary; print number 7002C (2013-2014) A4789 Amend and recommit to judiciary (2017-2018) referred to judiciary
Fiscal implications for state and local governments
None
Effective date
Immediately
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.