Opinion ID: 1373479
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The judicial function: arbitration generally

Text: (1) A proceeding to compel arbitration is in essence a suit in equity to compel specific performance of a contract. ( Trubowitch v. Riverbank Canning Co. (1947) 30 Cal.2d 335, 347 [182 P.2d 182].) (2) Arbitration is, of course, a matter of contract, and the parties may freely delineate the area of its application. ( O'Malley v. Wilshire Oil Co. (1963) 59 Cal.2d 482, 490 [30 Cal. Rptr. 452, 381 P.2d 188].) To this should be added that where a statute requires the contract to provide for certain matters, the statute becomes a part of the contract, imposing an arbitration agreement at least as broad as the statutory specifications. (See Wildman v. Government Employees' Ins. Co. (1957) 48 Cal.2d 31, 39-40 [307 P.2d 359].) Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2 was drafted by the California Law Revision Commission to prescribe and limit the power of the superior court in passing upon a petition to compel arbitration. (See 3 Cal. Law Revision Com. Rep. (1961) pp. G 6-7 and G 36-37.) That section provides: On petition of a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence of a written agreement to arbitrate a controversy and that a party thereto refuses to arbitrate such controversy, the court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines that an agreement to arbitrate the controversy exists, unless it determines that: (a) The right to compel arbitration has been waived by the petitioner; or (b) Grounds exist for the revocation of the agreement.... (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.) (3) The clear purpose and effect of section 1281.2 is to require the superior court to determine in advance whether there is a duty to arbitrate the controversy which has arisen. The performance of this duty necessarily requires the court to examine and, to a limited extent, construe the underlying agreement. It is, of course, possible for the parties to agree that the arbitrator may determine the scope of his authority. The arbitrability of a dispute may itself be subject to arbitration if the parties have so provided in their contract. ( McCarroll v. L.A. County etc. Carpenters (1957) 49 Cal.2d 45, 65 [315 P.2d 322].) Even then, it is necessary for the court to examine the contract to ascertain whether the parties have so provided. (See 6A Corbin on Contracts, § 1444A; cf. Unimart v. Superior Court (1969) 1 Cal. App.3d 1039, 1045 [82 Cal. Rptr. 249].)