64 Pages Posted: 23 Apr 2010
Date Written: April 23, 2010
The claim that arbitrators do not create precedent recurs throughout the arbitration literature. As an empirical matter, however, it is increasingly clear that, in some arbitration systems, arbitrators often cite to other arbitrators, claim to rely on past awards, and promote adjudicatory consistency as an important system norm. Much like courts, then, arbitrators can (but do not always) create precedent that guides future behavior and provides a language in which disputants, lawyers, and adjudicators can express and resolve grievances. This Article provides a theoretical foundation for understanding the conditions under which such precedent will (or will not) arise. It identifies three considerations that may account for the development of precedent across a range of arbitration systems: (1) whether the arbitration system is structurally conducive to the creation of precedent; (2) whether arbitral precedent functions to fill gaps in (or displace) state-supplied law; and (3) whether arbitrators are likely to be viewed as legitimate producers of law in the relevant context. After explaining the relevance of these considerations, the Article explores how they might apply in different arbitration contexts and sets forth a research agenda capable of shedding light on arbitration not only as a mechanism for resolving disputes, but also as a mechanism for generating robust systems of privately made law.
Keywords: arbitration, precedent, contracts
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Weidemaier, Mark C., Toward a Theory of Precedent in Arbitration (April 23, 2010). William & Mary Law Review, Vol. 51, p. 1895, 2010; UNC Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1594970. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1594970