NINTH CIRCUIT: NO “MANIFEST DISREGARD OF THE LAW” WHERE ARBITRATORS MAY HAVE INTERPRETED LAW DIFFERENTLY
On October 7, 2009, we reported on See More Light Investments v. Morgan Stanley DW Inc., Case No. CV 08-580 (USDC D. Ariz. July 29, 2009), in which a court vacated an arbitration award for “manifest disregard of the law” based on the failure to apply the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (CACR), which the arbitrators had initially recognized as applicable law. On January 14, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the CACR is not “well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable” to the transaction at issue because the arbitrators may have concluded that the CACR should not apply based on its provisions, or simply “interpreted the CACR differently, then the district court did.” See More Light Investments v. Morgan Stanley DW Inc., No. 09-16953 (9th Cir. Jan. 14, 2011).
This post written by Michael Wolgin.
