On June 24, 2022, Justice Ostrager of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Hines v. Azoth Inv. SPC Ltd., 2022 NY Slip Op. 32025(U), holding that where an agreement to arbitrate is subject to the AAA rules, the question of arbitrability is for the arbitrators, not the court, explaining:
Defendants’ motion to compel the arbitration pursuant to CPLR § 7503 is granted as to defendant Azoth. Though it is a well-settled proposition that the question of arbitrability is generally an issue for judicial determination, an exception exists allowing the parties to arbitrate even the issue of arbitrability when they clearly and unmistakably so agree.
Here, defendants have shown that the plaintiffs unambiguously agreed to permit the arbitrators to decide the issue of arbitrability regarding disputes between plaintiffs and defendant Azoth. Section 6(f) of the Contracts provides that: “[i]f any dispute should arise between the parties that cannot be resolved informally, it shall be settled by arbitration in [the] New York … Office of the American Arbitration Association before a panel of three arbitrators … in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association….”. Section 6(f) is a broad arbitration provision applying to any dispute between the parties, including disputes related to the Contracts. Further, the AAA rules are expressly incorporated in the Contract. The AAA rules provide that a tribunal may have the power to rule on its own jurisdiction. Thus, the question of arbitrability falls to the arbitrators. Plaintiffs’
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).
attempts to contest this, by citing to various other provisions contained in the Contracts such as the Attorney’s fees provision found in §6(h), are unavailing.