(a) Jurisdiction of the Court; applications to the Court. — The term “Court” means the Court of Chancery of this State, except where otherwise specifically provided. The making of an agreement described in § 5701 of this title specifically referencing the Delaware Uniform Arbitration Act [§ 5701 et seq. of this title] and the parties’ desire to have it apply to their agreement confers jurisdiction on the Court to enforce the agreement under this chapter and to enter judgment on an award thereunder, except as provided in § 5718 of this title. Action shall be commenced by an initial complaint and shall be heard in the manner and upon the notice provided by law or rule of court on any civil action. Notice of an initial complaint shall be served in the manner provided by law for the service of summons in an action.
(b) Venue. — An initial complaint shall be made to the Court with the Register in Chancery in and for the county in which the agreement provides the arbitration hearing shall be held or, if the hearing has been held, in the county in which it was held. Otherwise the complaint shall be filed with the Register in Chancery in the county where the adverse party resides or has a place of business or, if the adverse party has no residence or place of business in this State, to the Register in and for any county. All subsequent pleadings or applications for an order made under this chapter shall be filed in the Court hearing the initial complaint unless the Court otherwise directs.
(c) Court of Chancery jurisdiction over arbitration-related disputes in cases not governed by the Delaware Uniform Arbitration Act. — Unless an arbitration agreement complies with the standard set forth in subsection (a) of this section for the applicability of the Delaware Uniform Arbitration Act, any application to the Court of Chancery to enjoin or stay an arbitration, obtain an order requiring arbitration, or to vacate or enforce an arbitrator’s award shall be decided by the Court of Chancery in conformity with the Federal Arbitration Act [9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.], and such general principles of law and equity as are not inconsistent with that Act. In such cases, the other provisions of this Delaware Uniform Arbitration Act are without standing and cases shall be adjudicated in accordance with the Court of Chancery’s Rules of Procedure.
(d) Jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas. — Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Chapter 57 of this title, the term “Court” in this chapter shall refer to the Court of Common Pleas with respect to all actions arising from an arbitration agreement in or relating to a contract to provide consumer credit, and the making of such an agreement to arbitrate issues arising from the extension of consumer credit shall confer jurisdiction on the Court of Common Pleas, and not the Court of Chancery, to enforce the agreement and to enter judgment on an award. Any action brought under this Chapter 57 of this title relating to an agreement to arbitrate issues arising from the extension of consumer credit filed in the Court of Chancery shall not therefore be dismissed, but shall be transferred to the Court of Common Pleas for resolution there as though filed originally in that Court.
10 Del. C. 1953,
§
5702;
58 Del. Laws, c. 382,
§
2;
70 Del. Laws, c. 186,
§
1;
76 Del. Laws, c. 34,
§
1;
77 Del. Laws, c. 8,
§§
2, 3;
Notes of Decisions
SpecialtyCare, Inc. v. Medcost, LLC (Del. Ch. 2026).
· cites it 4× “See 10 Del. C. § 5702(a). The requirements for confirmation of an arbitrator’s decision largely mimics the FAA, where a party need only make its application to the reviewing court within one year of the arbitrator’s decision.”
SC&A Constr., Inc. v. Potter (Del. Ch. 2016).
· cites it 2× “The Arbitrator issued his “Final Award of Arbitrator” (the “Arbitration Award”) on September 23, 2014, finding in 2 But see 10 Del C. § 5702(a) (granting the Court of Chancery jurisdiction to enforce an agreement to arbitrate).”
Mark A. Gomes v. Ian Karnell (Del. Ch. 2016).
· cites it 2× “” 10 Del. C.§ 5702(a). If the agreement makes no such statement, the Court of Chancery must apply the principles of the Act to the agreement.”
UPM-Kymmene Corp. v. Renmatix, Inc. (Del. Ch. 2017).
· cites it 2× “shall be decided by the Court of Chancery in conformity with the Federal Arbitration Act and such principles of law and equity as are not inconsistent with that Act” unless the “arbitration agreement complies with the standard set forth in subsection (a) of this section for the…”
Gulf LNG Energy, LLC v. ENI USA Gas Mktg., LLC (Del. Ch. 2019).
· cites it 2× “Procedural History On June 17, 2019, Gulf filed this action under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) and 10 Del. C. §§ 5702 and 5703(b), seeking two forms or relief: (i) “a permanent injunction staying the Second Arbitration” (Count I) and (ii) “a declaratory judgment that Eni .”
Gulf LNG Energy v. ENI USA Gas Mktg. (Del. 2020).
· cites it 2× “24 On June 17, 2019, Gulf responded with this action in the Court of Chancery under the FAA and 10 Del. C. §§ 5702, 5703(b), seeking (i) a permanent injunction staying the Second Arbitration and (ii) a “declaratory judgment that Eni .”
— 10 Del. C. § 5702(a) — 15 cases
SC&A Constr., Inc. v. Potter (Del. Ch. 2016).
“The Arbitrator issued his “Final Award of Arbitrator” (the “Arbitration Award”) on September 23, 2014, finding in 2 But see 10 Del C. § 5702(a) (granting the Court of Chancery jurisdiction to enforce an agreement to arbitrate).”
SpecialtyCare, Inc. v. Medcost, LLC (Del. Ch. 2026).
“See 10 Del. C. § 5702(a). The requirements for confirmation of an arbitrator’s decision largely mimics the FAA, where a party need only make its application to the reviewing court within one year of the arbitrator’s decision.”
— 10 Del. C. § 5702(a)(c) — 1 case
— 10 Del. C. § 5702(c) — 15 cases
SpecialtyCare, Inc. v. Medcost, LLC (Del. Ch. 2026).
“See 10 Del. C. § 5702(a). The requirements for confirmation of an arbitrator’s decision largely mimics the FAA, where a party need only make its application to the reviewing court within one year of the arbitrator’s decision.”
Mark A. Gomes v. Ian Karnell (Del. Ch. 2016).
“” 10 Del. C.§ 5702(a). If the agreement makes no such statement, the Court of Chancery must apply the principles of the Act to the agreement.”
UPM-Kymmene Corp. v. Renmatix, Inc. (Del. Ch. 2017).
“shall be decided by the Court of Chancery in conformity with the Federal Arbitration Act and such principles of law and equity as are not inconsistent with that Act” unless the “arbitration agreement complies with the standard set forth in subsection (a) of this section for the…”
Gulf LNG Energy, LLC v. ENI USA Gas Mktg., LLC (Del. Ch. 2019).
“Procedural History On June 17, 2019, Gulf filed this action under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) and 10 Del. C. §§ 5702 and 5703(b), seeking two forms or relief: (i) “a permanent injunction staying the Second Arbitration” (Count I) and (ii) “a declaratory judgment that Eni .”
— 10 Del. C. § 5702(d) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.