The United States Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that under the Federal Arbitration Act, an arbitrator – and not a court – is to determine the preclusive effect of an arbitrator’s earlier ruling.

In the case, insurers engaged in three reinsurance agreements had previously arbitrated concerning one of the insurer’s billing methodologies. When a similar dispute occurred years later, the victors in the first arbitration – rather than pursuing arbitration – filed in federal court in Chicago seeking to have the court declare that the prior arbitration award precluded re-arbitration of the latest dispute. The insurer on the other side of the dispute moved to compel arbitration, a motion granted by the district court. The plaintiff insurers appealed.