![]() 905,518,334 visitors served. |
|
![]() Dictionary/ thesaurus | ![]() Medical dictionary | ![]() Legal dictionary | ![]() Financial dictionary | ![]() Acronyms | ![]() Idioms | ![]() Encyclopedia | ![]() Wikipedia encyclopedia | ? |
Arbitrator |
Also found in: Wikipedia | 0.17 sec. |
|
arbitrator n. one who conducts an arbitration, and serves as a judge who conducts a "mini-trial," somewhat less formally than a court trial. In most cases the arbitraror is an attorney, either alone or as part of a panel. Most court jurisdictions now have lists of attorneys who serve as arbitrators. Other arbitrators come from arbitration services which provide lists from which the parties can agree on an arbitrator (many of whom are retired judges--even "People's Court" Judge Wapner is on such a panel in Los Angeles County). There is also the American Arbitration Association which usually has a panel of attorneys chosen by the association. Professional arbitration services are paid well to move cases along. There are also arbitrators who are experts on everything from construction to maritime damage. In some contracts there is a provision for such an expert-type arbitrator named by each side with a third chosen by the other two. (See: arbitration) ARBITRATOR. A private extraordinary judge chosen by the parties who have a matter in dispute, invested with power to decide the same. Arbitrators are so called because they have generally an arbitrary power, there being in common no appeal from their sentences, which are called awards. Vide Caldw. on Arb. Index,. h.t.; Kyd on Awards, Index, h.t. 3 Bouv. Inst. n. 2491. |
|
? References in periodicals archive |
|---|
The Commission is not a court or an arbitral tribunal before which the parties appear; it is a political organ that performs an essentially fact-finding function of examining claims, verifying their validity, evaluating losses, assessing payments and resolving disputed claims; it is only in this last respect that a quasi-judicial function may be involved. At the same time, Pomini is contesting Farrel's efforts to enforce the arbitration decision based on Farrel's failure to abide by its terms, Farrel's misrepresentations regarding the decision and the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal. Upon the action of the first Defendant [DT] the arbitral tribunal had determined with final and binding effect only against the second Defendant [Elektrim] that the transfer of shares in Polska Telefonia Cyfrowa, established in 1995, from the second Defendant [Elektrim] to the Plaintiff [Telco] was legally ineffective. |
| Free Tools: |
For surfers:
Browser extension |
Word of the Day |
Help
For webmasters: Free content NEW! | Linking | Lookup box | Double-click lookup | Partner with us |
|
|---|