Opinion ID: 2564358
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Enactment of Chapter 658A

Text: In 2001, HRS chapter 658 was replaced by a modified version of the Uniform Arbitration Act. 2001 Haw. Sess. L. Act 265, §§ 5, 8 at 820. As originally promulgated, HRS § 658A-3 (Supp.2001) specifically provided that: When chapter applies. (a) Except as provided in subsection (c), this chapter governs an agreement to arbitrate made on or after July 1, 2002. (b) This chapter governs an agreement to arbitrate made before July 1, 2002, if all the parties to the agreement or to the arbitration proceeding so agree in a record. (c) After June 30, 2004, this chapter governs an agreement to arbitrate whenever made. (Bold emphasis in original.) In 2002, the legislature amended HRS § 658A-3 by adding an additional sentence to subsection 3(b), which provides that: If the parties to the agreement or to the arbitration do not so agree in a record, an agreement to arbitrate that is made before July 1, 2002, shall be governed by the law specified in the agreement to arbitrate or, if none is specified, by the state law in effect on the date when the arbitration began or on June 30, 2002, whichever first occurred. 2002 Haw. Sess. L. Act. 50, § 1 at 186. In amending subsection 3(b), the legislature specifically stated that: The purpose of this measure is to clarify the applicability of the State's Revised Uniform Arbitration Act, codified last year as Chapter 658A[.] . . . . Your Committee finds that the measure addresses an omission in the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act which governs arbitration agreements made prior to the effective date of Chapter 658A, HRS, if agreed to by the parties to the agreement or to the arbitration proceeding. However, the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act is silent as to which law governs if the parties do not agree. This measure will enable the use of the provision in the previous arbitration law, which has since been repealed, when warranted. Sen. Stand. Comm. Rep. No. 3169, in 2002 Senate Journal, at 1511; see also Sen. Stand. Comm. Rep. No. 2850, in 2002 Senate Journal, at 1378-79; Hse. Stand Comm. Rep. No. 260, in 2002 House Journal, at 1331. [15] Accordingly, the current version of HRS § 658A-3 (Supp.2005) provides in its entirety: When chapter applies. (a) Except as provided in subsection (c), this chapter governs an agreement to arbitrate made on or after July 1, 2002. (b) This chapter governs an agreement to arbitrate made before July 1, 2002, if all the parties to the agreement or to the arbitration proceeding so agree in a record. If the parties to the agreement or to the arbitration do not so agree in a record, an agreement to arbitrate that is made before July 1, 2002, shall be governed by the law specified in the agreement to arbitrate or, if none is specified, by the state law in effect on the date when the arbitration began or on June 30, 2002, whichever first occurred. (c) After June 30, 2004, this chapter governs an agreement to arbitrate whenever made. (Bold emphasis in original.) We have repeatedly announced that: In construing statutes, a court's primary objective is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the legislature as gleaned primarily from the language contained in the statute itself. Accordingly, it is well settled that this court is bound by the plain, clear[,] and unambiguous language of a statute[,] unless the literal construction would produce an absurd and unjust result, and would be clearly inconsistent with the purposes and policies of the statute. CARL Corp. v. State of Hawai`i, Dep't of Educ., 85 Hawai`i 431, 459, 946 P.2d 1, 29 (1997) (internal quotation marks, ellipses, original brackets, and citations omitted) (format altered). Furthermore, we must read statutory language in the context of the entire statute and construe it in a manner consistent with its purpose. Courbat v. Dahana Ranch, Inc., 111 Hawai`i 254, 260, 141 P.3d 427, 433 (2006) (citations omitted). Bearing the foregoing principles in mind, we now examine the language of HRS § 658A-3 as it applies to the instant case.