Impartiality of Arbitrators
Seeing the arbitrator playing golf with the other party is not a ground that can be used by a party to overturn an arbitration determination. This is because it does not prove the impartiality or unfairness of the arbitrator when handling the case. Partiality is a valid ground that has to be proven in cases that a party feels that the decision was unjust and unfair to them, which cannot be proven by one party seeing the arbitrator playing golf with the other.
Furthermore, the challenging party is mandated to prove that the award procured through fraud, corruption of undue influence. The courts have come out and laid down these factors as part of the three-part test for proving that the arbitration award needs to be overturned. Therefore, the alleging party must prove their allegations before the courts can determine whether they should overturn the decision. For instance, it would be a valid ground if, during the golf, one could see that the arbitrator was paid some amount as a bribe for the matter. Then the courts may consider the arbitrator to have been corrupt and their decision equivocal.
In addition, the individuals played golf after the award was finalized. The interaction of the parties would be a ground of partiality if it occurred as the matter was being determined. Arbitrators are required to be impartial, and in case of any meeting, they are mandated to inform both parties and invite them both. By doing so, then they can avert the questions of them having some conflict of interest in the matter. Therefore, after the matter has been finalized, then the parties are free to interact however they deem fit.