Should Arbitrators be Immune from Liability?

In resolving disputes, arbitrators perform the role of adjudication. Their role is resembled to and often referred to as arbitrators acting in 'quasi-judicial capacity' such that arbitrators, in many important jurisdictions, are granted immunity akin to those afforded to judges known as 'judicial immunity'. However, professionals working in different disciplines are not granted any such immunity. If that is the case with all other professionals, why should arbitrators be granted immunity? On the contrary, arbitrators perform an important function of adjudicating which relieves the national and international court systems from the influx of thousands of disputes every year while rendering awards in an efficient and effective manner suitable for business needs as opposed to lengthy litigation process. Given the important functions arbitrators perform that can be referred to as quasi-judicial function, it justifies their enjoying immunity in this capacity otherwise arbitrators would not feel safe to act as such. The article develops on these two dimensions as outlined above and sheds light on the background to judicial and arbitral immunity, the cases for and against the notion of arbitral immunity, the different approaches taken by various jurisdictions on this subject matter from a comparative and a critical perspective.