CORRESPONDENCE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 181, 12 July 1884, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

We do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions expressed by our correspondents.)

FEES TO ARBITRATORS.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—The recent discussion at the Harbor Board meeting as to the charges of Mr. Reynold’s and others, for their awards in reference to Common, Shelton and Co’s, claim for the value of their buildings on the foreshore has led me to state shortly, for the general information of the inhabitants, the legal points arising as to the claims of arbitrators for their fees. The most conspicuous expenses in the process of arbitration arc the fees to arbitrators. If an arbitrator accepts office, and nothing is said about his remuneration, he cannot recover the subsequent charges which he may think it right to make, for when there is no express understanding for the remuneration of an arbitrator, and he has already published his award, his remuneration rests entirely with the option of the party or parties. Hence it is considered only reasonable for an arbitrator to make it a condition that if he accepts office, he is to be paid, and a distinct stipulation for payment, either written or verbal, duly witnessed, is sufficient to entitle the arbitrator to an action for the recovery of his fees, though the amount be not mentioned. Whether there is a stipulation for remuneration or not, arbitrators have a lien on their awards. So that if an arbitrator gives notice that the award is ready for publication, as soon as his fees are paid any condition in the appointment requiring the making of the award by a particular date, is thereby fulfilled and satisfied; though he is not bound to disclose, and he ought not to disclose the nature of the award, and he cannot be compelled to take any further action until his demand is satisfied. When the claim for remuneration on the part of an arbitrator is exorbitant, the party aggrieved may submit the amount to be taxed; and there is an opinion current that an arbitrator is bound to publish his award on payment of his charge after taxation. Considerable doubt surrounds the exact nature of an arbitrator with regard to his taxed hill. It appears that Courts will not in any case interfere between an arbitrator and a party to an arbitration with reference to the adjustment of the fees—therefore

if the publication of an award is stayed for payment of the fees, the only course open to either of the parties considering himself interested in alacrity is to tender the full amount of the demand, however exorbitant it may be ; for though as a general rule it may be concluded that an arbitrator cannot be compelled to publish his award until his charges are fully paid; yet it is clear that when an arbitrator extorts an unreasonable amount, he is liable to an action for recovery back again of any excess which maybe proved. The duty of an arbitrator is one which of necessity when properly discharged commands respect; therefore the amount which an arbitrator may reasonably charge for his services must be computed in a decidedly libaral spirit, so that anj r effort to procure the adjustment of arbitration fees upon grounds or representations which savour of parsimony must be futile, for, according to the amount involved in the award and the rank of the arbitrator and parties, the remuneration which may be considered fair in any particular case is beyond computation ; consequently it is very much to be desired, in the interests of all parties, that every reference to arbitration should not only be accompanied by a stipulation for payment of the arbitrator, but also some understanding for a certain or qualified amount. Lex.