Arbitration

Arbitration can only take place where both Parties in dispute consent to a common Arbitrator. They must both – of their own free will, without duress, and without deception – agree:

  1. To use a common Arbitrator to hear the details of the dispute, and
  2. To abide by the Arbitrator’s judgment.

Unless both Parties agree to these terms, no Arbitrator has any authority whatsoever to create any judgment.

This is simply because of the nature of ‘authority’ – which has to be extended. It is only extended by means of (1) and (2), above. ‘Authority’ cannot be bought, sold, or otherwise assumed.

Otherwise the authority just simply does not exist. If it did, then ‘authority via the barrel of a gun’ would exist and would be acceptable practice, instead of being deplorable, dishonest, dishonourable and utterly despicable.

For (1) and (2) to occur, both parties must trust the common Arbitrator. If either Party does not fully trust the Arbitrator, then honourable arbitration cannot take place.

A Court which does not have BOTH Parties TRUST and CONSENT does not have any AUTHORITY to make any decision that is binding in the Common Law. It is simply operating (metaphorically) ‘via the barrel of a gun’, and thus acting in a deplorable, dishonest, dishonourable and utterly despicable manner.

The only exception to this is for a Common Law offence (i.e. NOT a ‘dispute’), where an Accused is heard by Jury of 12. And where said Jury returns a verdict based solely on the Common Law (as opposed to a form of ‘judgment’).

If, by the refusal of one Party or the other to participate in the Arbitration of any dispute, said dispute remains unresolved, then there is nothing wrong with that. Both Parties are perfectly capable of agreeing, in a perfectly civilised manner, never to interact with each other ever again. If one Party feels ‘aggrieved’, then it should remember that we all feel aggrieved at various times in our lives. And that we learn by our mistaken alliances.

Arbitration (or Adjudication, if one prefers the term) without AUTHORITY is directly akin to the following scenario.

You are walking past the door of a Restaurant. As you do so, two Robots (with pointed heads, or flat-caps, wearing blue cloth, covered in chrome Masonic Regalia), grab you, handcuff you, and drag you inside. You are thrust into a chair, in front of a table, and a plateful of cat food is placed in front of you. You are told to eat it. You are then told you must pay £4,000 for this privilege, or face being jailed.

That is the equivalent to Arbitration without (1) and (2), above.

PLEASE FEEL ENTIRELY FREE TO RUN THIS EXPLANATION PAST ANYONE IN THE “LEGAL” PROFESSION.