Arbitrator Code of Ethics: Impartiality, Disclosure, and Violations

The Arbitrator Code of Ethics — formally, the Code of Ethics for Arbitrators in Commercial Disputes — is the behavioral rulebook that commercial arbitrators are expected to follow when deciding private legal disputes. It was created in 1977 by the American Arbitration Association and the American Bar Association, revised in 2003, and took effect in its current form on March 1, 2004. It applies to every arbitrator in a commercial case, whether sitting alone or on a panel. The Code is not itself a statute, but its standards show up in court decisions, in the rules of arbitration providers, and in the grounds courts use to vacate awards under the Federal Arbitration Act.

What the Code Requires

The Code is organized into ten canons. The duties they create fall into a handful of practical obligations an arbitrator carries from the moment of appointment through long after the award is issued.

Act With Integrity and Keep Impartial

Canon I sets the baseline: arbitrators must uphold high standards of integrity, fairness, and diligence, and give each side genuine, unbiased consideration. An arbitrator who cannot commit the time or attention a case needs is expected to decline the appointment rather than accept and underperform.

The integrity duty follows the arbitrator outside the hearing room. After accepting a case, an arbitrator must avoid any business, professional, or personal relationship that could affect impartiality or create the appearance of bias, and that restriction continues for a reasonable period after the case ends.¹ If a party learns of such a relationship and still consents after full disclosure, the appointment remains ethical.

Investigate and Disclose Conflicts

Canon II places an affirmative duty on arbitrators to look into their own potential conflicts and disclose anything a reasonable person would consider likely to affect impartiality or create an appearance of bias.¹ Waiting for conflicts to surface is not enough. Arbitrators are expected to make a reasonable effort to identify connections with any party, attorney, or potential witness before taking the case.

The categories are broad. Financial interests such as stock in a party’s parent company, past or present business relationships with a law firm in the case, and personal connections like family ties or close friendships all require disclosure. The duty does not stop with the initial disclosure. If a new conflict surfaces mid-hearing — a late-disclosed witness turns out to be a former business partner, say — the arbitrator must raise it right away.

Social Media and Digital Connections

No statute or rule yet addresses social media disclosures in arbitration, but AAA guidance treats online connections as a real source of conflict questions. The guiding principle is that when an arbitrator takes affirmative action to connect with an arbitration participant on a social or professional network, that creates at least an appearance of partiality.²

Under the guidance, arbitrators should disclose friendships, connections, or follows they have initiated with parties, lawyers, or witnesses on platforms such as LinkedIn or Facebook. If a participant follows the arbitrator without any reciprocal action, no disclosure is required. Likes, comments, and reposts do not require disclosure unless they relate to the subject matter of the arbitration.²

No Ex Parte Communications

Canon III states the simplest and most frequently tested rule in the Code: don’t talk to one side without the other present. Ex parte communications are prohibited because they give one party access to the decision-maker that the other side cannot see or respond to.¹

Narrow exceptions exist for purely administrative matters, such as scheduling and procedural logistics, because they don’t touch the substance of the dispute. If one of these contacts drifts toward the facts of the case, the arbitrator must shut it down immediately.

On settlement, Canon IV lets an arbitrator suggest that the parties explore settlement, mediation, or other resolution options. The arbitrator cannot pressure anyone to settle and cannot participate in settlement discussions or act as a mediator unless every party asks.³

Run a Fair Proceeding

Canon IV requires the arbitrator to manage the hearing with fairness, diligence, and enough preparation to keep things moving. Every participant must get a full and equal chance to present evidence and arguments. The arbitrator controls the pace and schedule but cannot let efficiency override anyone’s right to be heard.

Decide Personally, and Only What Was Submitted

Canon V covers the decision itself. The arbitrator must decide all issues the parties submitted — and only those issues. Reaching beyond the agreed scope is a statutory ground for vacating an award.⁴ The arbitrator must exercise independent judgment and cannot let outside pressure drive the result.⁵

The duty to decide cannot be delegated.⁵ Canon VI allows arbitrators to use research assistants, law clerks, or associates for background work and preliminary drafting, provided the parties are informed and the assistants agree to the Code’s confidentiality rules.¹ Support work is permitted; judgment calls are not. If the parties reach a settlement and ask the arbitrator to formalize it as a consent award, the award must state that it reflects a negotiated settlement rather than an adjudicated decision.

Keep It Confidential

Canon VI imposes a broad confidentiality obligation across every phase of the arbitration. Documents, testimony, and deliberations stay private. An arbitrator cannot use confidential information for personal advantage or anyone else’s benefit, and the restriction applies “at any time,” including after the final award.¹

On multi-arbitrator panels, deliberations are off-limits. No arbitrator may reveal how the panel voted, what was argued internally, or what the decision will be before it’s delivered to all parties. Once the award is issued, arbitrators also may not assist any party in enforcing or challenging it.¹ The arbitrator’s role ends when the award goes out.

Confidentiality has limits. When a party seeks to confirm or enforce an award in court, the award becomes part of the public court record under the Federal Arbitration Act and the Uniform Arbitration Act. Some states also require arbitration administrators to publish data about consumer and employment cases, including the names of business parties, win rates, and arbitrator fees.

Handle Fees Transparently

Canon VII treats compensation as another neutrality risk. Before finally accepting the appointment, the arbitrator must establish the basis of payment in writing to all parties, including hourly rates, cancellation fees, withdrawal compensation, and charges for study and preparation time. In institutionally administered cases, compensation communications should run through the institution rather than directly between the arbitrator and the parties. Absent extraordinary circumstances, an arbitrator should not request a fee increase after the proceeding has started.¹

Advertise Truthfully

Canon VIII permits arbitrators to market their services as long as claims about qualifications, experience, or track record are accurate and not misleading. Marketing cannot imply a willingness to accept appointments in ways that would conflict with the Code, such as suggesting the arbitrator would favor the hiring party.¹

Party-Appointed Arbitrators Are Held to a Different Standard

In some arbitrations, each side appoints one arbitrator to a three-member panel, and those party-appointed arbitrators are not expected to be neutral. The Code calls them “Canon X arbitrators.”¹

A Canon X arbitrator may be predisposed toward the appointing party, both generally and in the final vote on the merits. Predisposition is not permission for anything. Canon X arbitrators must still act in good faith and with integrity, disclose all interests and relationships to every party and fellow arbitrator, and comply with the Code’s confidentiality rules.⁵

Communication rules are relaxed but not gone. Canon X arbitrators may consult privately with the party who appointed them, but must disclose the intent to do so at the earliest opportunity. They cannot share panel deliberations, communicate about issues after the record closes, or reveal any decision before it reaches all parties. Unless the parties agree otherwise, a Canon X arbitrator cannot speak privately with the neutral arbitrator without the other Canon X arbitrator present.

What Happens When an Arbitrator Violates the Code

The Code itself has no independent enforcement mechanism. It isn’t a statute, and violating it does not carry fines or criminal penalties. Its force comes from two places.

First, courts apply the Federal Arbitration Act’s grounds for vacating an award — particularly “evident partiality” and arbitrator “misconduct” — in ways that closely track the Code’s requirements.⁴ Courts have applied the evident-partiality standard to situations where an arbitrator failed to disclose a material conflict even when no actual bias existed. The appearance alone can be enough to unwind months of proceedings and force the parties to start over.

Second, arbitration institutions police their own rosters. The AAA retains sole discretion over its panel and can remove arbitrators based on performance, qualifications, or conduct, and material inaccuracies in an arbitrator’s application or disclosure forms can trigger removal.⁶ For arbitrators whose work depends on institutional appointments, losing roster access is the more immediate consequence, with no court filing required.

1
American Arbitration Association. Code of Ethics for Arbitrators in Commercial Disputes
2
American Arbitration Association. Transparent Connections: ADR, Attorneys and Social Media Disclosures
3
CPR Dispute Resolution Services. Code of Ethics for Arbitrators in Commercial Disputes
4
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 9 USC 10 – Same; Vacation; Grounds; Rehearing
5
American Arbitration Association. The Code of Ethics for Arbitrators in Commercial Disputes
6
American Arbitration Association. Standards and Responsibilities for Members of the AAA Roster of Arbitrators and Mediators