Answer ... For awards rendered in the United States (whether domestic or international), awards can only be vacated pursuant to the grounds stipulated in Section 10 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) (Hall Street Associates LLC v Mattel, Inc, 552 US 576 (2008)). Therefore, the US court in and for the district in which an arbitral award was made may, on the application of a party to the arbitration, vacate the award on one of the following grounds:

• The award was obtained by corruption, fraud or undue means;
• The arbitrators were guilty of misconduct in:
• • refusing to postpone the hearing on sufficient cause shown;
  • refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy; or
  • behaving in any other way by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced; or
• The arbitrators exceeded their powers or so imperfectly executed them that they did not make a mutual, final and definite award on the subject matter submitted.

As stated by the Supreme Court in Stolt-Nielsen SA v Animal Feeds Int’l Corp, a party seeking to overturn an award on these grounds “must clear a high hurdle” (559 US 662, 671 (2010)). More recently, the Tenth Circuit remarked that: “Once an arbitration award is entered, the finality of arbitration weighs heavily in its favor and cannot be upset except under exceptional circumstances” (Mid-Atl Cap Corp v Bien 956 F3d 1182 (10th Cir 2020)).

Pursuant to the New York Convention, which is adopted by the FAA at § 201, a court may refuse to recognise or enforce a foreign arbitral award only if it finds one or more of the following:

• The parties to the agreement were under some incapacity or the agreement is not valid under the law;
• The party against which the award is invoked was not given proper notice of the appointment of the arbitrator or of the arbitration proceedings;
• The award deals with a difference not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration;
• The composition of the arbitral authority or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties; or
• The award has not yet become binding on the parties, or has been set aside or suspended by a competent authority of the country in which, or under the law of which, that award was made.

Finally, it should be noted that courts have held that arbitral awards may be vacated based on the arbitrator’s manifest disregard of the law. This judicially advanced standard has been outlined as follows: “Manifest disregard can be established only where a governing legal principle is well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable to the case, and where the arbitrator ignored it after it was brought to the arbitrator’s attention in a way that assures that the arbitrator knew its controlling nature” (see Goldman v Architectural Iron Co, 306 F3d 1214, 1216 (2d Cir 2002)). For decisions that have considered this doctrine, see Copragri SA v Agribusiness United DMCC, No 20 Civ 5486, 2021 WL 961751 (SDNY, 15 March 2021); Weiss v Sallie Mae, Inc, 939 F3d 105, 109 (2d Cir 2019)).

Answer ... Yes. An application to vacate, modify or correct the award must be brought within three months of it being made (9 USC § 2). The application must also be served on the opposing party within three months of the award being filed or delivered; and the action must be brought in the district where the award was made. A federal court will also be required to have jurisdiction over the matter.

Answer ... No. The Supreme Court, in Hall St Assocs, LLC v Mattel, Inc, 552 US 576 (2008), held that the grounds for vacatur of an award under Section 10 of the FAA are exclusive and cannot be expanded or removed by contract.