Arbitrators are as much given to error as judges, or for that matter any other category of persons1. Error in the arbitral process, at least in its potential, is a manifold phenomenon. Notwithstanding its possible range and multiformity, arbitral error is susceptible of at least two broad divisions.

First, there is error which may be categorized as fundamental. An arbitrator may adopt an erroneous view of the relevant law or may apply the law to the facts in a manner incapable of reasonable support. His findings of fact may be wholly unsupported by the evidence. He may fall into error in the conduct of the reference; he may fail to comprehend the basis of the dispute between the parties or the import of their submissions, or misunderstand the directions of the parties as to the manner in which he is to discharge his authority. There are undoubtedly many other possible illustrations but what ties them together as a class is that they are errors of which the arbitrator is generally unaware until the error is brought to his attention at a later stage by an arbitral appellate tribunal or a court of law. Nor, until then, in the face of challenge, would he necessarily concede that there has been an error, notwithstanding that either or even both of the parties disagree with his findings, analysis, assessment and conclusions2. The other, and probably dominant, feature is that the arbitrator acts purposively on the basis of the error. In other words, his actions as expounded in the award correspond wholly with his state of mind, although the latter is subsequently revealed to be in a state of error. Once this revelation is made, to put the error to rights entails a change of mind on the part of the arbitrator.

The other category of error, which may be categorized as accidental error, is less serious and grave in its form, but may be of equal significance in its consequence. An error of the pen or a slip on a typewriter key in the writing up of an award may produce an inadvertent error. In finalizing his award an arbitrator may unintentionally include or omit from the award matter which he had no conscious design to include or omit. In practice, the accidental omission is the greater probability. In considering his award, he may inadvertently transpose the arguments of the parties or adopt the wrong figures or measurements. As the adopted nomenclature suggests, the key to this category of error is that it is accidental. It is the product of a slip or mishap and often survives in the award through the failure of the arbitrator properly to scrutinize his award before it is finally made. Once revealed, the error is usually readily recognized and admitted by the arbitrator. In part, its manifestation is an award which does not correspond with the design and intent of the arbitrator, for the mind and the pen are not in harmony. In other regards, although a purposive award is made, nonetheless it is seriously defective