America Vs Carba Case Analysis

In general, U.S. courts have long favored enforcement of arbitration awards. As the Second Circuit noted in Diapulse Corp. of America v. Carba, Ltd. 37 a case decided under the Federal Arbitration Act, [t]he purpose of arbitration is to permit a relatively quick and inexpensive resolution of contractual disputes by avoiding the expense and delay of extended court proceedings.... Accordingly, it is a well-settled proposition that judicial review of an arbitration award should be, and is, very narrowly limited. 38 As another court has expressed this view, "[lt is not the function of a district court to review the record of an arbitration proceeding for mere errors of law or fact."'39 These public policy concerns apply with even greater strength
to enforcement of foreign awards under the Convention. In Scherk v. AlbertoCulver Co.,40 the Supreme Court observed: The goal of the Convention, and the principal purpose underlying American adoption and implementation of it, was to encourage the recognition and enforcement of commercial arbitration agreements in international contracts and to unify the standards by which agreements to arbitrate are observed and arbitral awards are enforced in the signatory countries.41 Thus, courts must not only take into account the strong public policy favoring arbitration, but also must adopt standards and define defenses in a manner that can be uniformly applied on an international scale. Because of these strong policy considerations, any defenses to the enforcement or recognition of an award are