At a time when prominent commentators in our community are asking whether arbitrators possess sufficient powers to address disruptive misconduct by parties and their counsel, a US District Judge in New York has issued a 45-page opinion that recites a five-year history of such conduct by a party in a high-value case involving a US private equity investment in Latin America. The Court’s decision – confirming a Tribunal’s final award and denying a motion to vacate based on “evident partiality” — rejects the notion that a party may engage in such misconduct during the proceedings and then achieve an ouster of the Tribunal on the basis that the arbitrators’ displeasure constitutes unacceptable bias. I was the Chair of the Tribunal in the case.  It is a rare exception to my practice in publishing this “Blog” to feature any of my own cases. But this decision is worth sharing with you.

A Jus Mundi link, where the June 17, 2026 Opinion of the Court, and several of the Court’s prior opinions and the Tribunal’s five partial final awards can be read, is here: https://jusmundi.com/en/document/decision/en-telecom-business-solution-llc-and-latam-towers-llc-v-terra-towers-corp-tbs-management-s-a-dt-holdings-inc-jorge-hernandez-alberto-arzu-and-continental-towers-latam-holdings-ltd-memorandum-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-court-for-the-southern-district-of-new-york-confirming-and-denying-vacatur-of-final-arbitration-award-wednesday-17th-june-2026#decision_89551