If parties to an arbitration have failed to agree, where they apply to the court and the court appoints an arbitrator, and one party alleges that the arbitrator is not impartial is this a matter of jurisdiction? If one is appointed an arbitrator and one party says that part of the matters agreed to be covered by the arbitration agreement is outside the scope of arbitration agreement is that a jurisdiction question?
Assuming that grounds have arisen to challenge an arbitrator and one of the parties wants to challenge or to ask for the removal of that arbitrator. How is this effected? The current arbitration Act in an effort to limit the numbers of avenues that one can use to challenge an arbitrator.