Which of the following statements accurately reflects the basis for judicial review of arbitral awards?

Judicial review of arbitral awards is generally limited in scope to specific grounds established by law, primarily aimed at ensuring that the arbitration process is fair and just while respecting the autonomy of the arbitration process. The correct option indicates that review focuses on misconduct, bias, and procedural defects.

This means that if there is evidence that the arbitrators acted with partiality or engaged in corrupt practices, or if there were significant procedural irregularities that affected the fairness of the proceedings, the courts may intervene to vacate the award. Instead of delving into the merits of the case or the correctness of the arbitrators' decision concerning the law or facts, courts will typically only assess whether the arbitration procedures adhered to basic fairness and due process.

This limited scope is crucial because it helps maintain respect for the arbitration process as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. It also prevents the courts from undermining the purpose of arbitration which is to provide a more efficient and private means of resolving disputes without unnecessary judicial interventions.

Considering the other options, the first option suggests that any legal error could lead to vacating an award, which would undermine the finality of arbitration. The third option implies that factual errors alone can justify vacating an award, which similarly disregards the principle that