ILCS » Chapter 710 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

710 ILCS 5/12 (2026)

Vacating an award

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(710 ILCS 5/12) (from Ch. 10, par. 112)
    Sec. 12. Vacating an award.)
    (a) Upon application of a party, the court shall vacate an award where:
        (1) the award was procured by corruption, fraud or
    
other undue means;
        (2) there was evident partiality by an arbitrator
    
appointed as a neutral or corruption in any one of the arbitrators or misconduct prejudicing the rights of any party;
        (3) the arbitrators exceeded their powers;
        (4) the arbitrators refused to postpone the hearing
    
upon sufficient cause being shown therefor or refused to hear evidence material to the controversy or otherwise so conducted the hearing, contrary to the provisions of Section 5, as to prejudice substantially the rights of a party; or
        (5) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue
    
was not adversely determined in proceedings under Section 2 and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; but the fact that the relief was such that it could not or would not be granted by the circuit court is not ground for vacating or refusing to confirm the award.
    (b) An application under this Section shall be made within 90 days after delivery of a copy of the award to the applicant, except that if predicated upon corruption, fraud or other undue means, it shall be made within 90 days after such grounds are known or should have been known.
    (c) In vacating the award on grounds other than stated in clause (5) of subsection (a) the court may order a rehearing before new arbitrators chosen as provided in Section 3, or if the award is vacated on grounds set forth in clauses (3) and (4) of subsection (a) the court may order a rehearing before the arbitrators who made the award or their successors appointed in accordance with Section 3. The time within which the agreement requires the award to be made is applicable to the rehearing and commences from the date of the order.
    (d) If the application to vacate is denied and no motion to modify or correct the award is pending, the court shall confirm the award.
    (e) Nothing in this Section or any other Section of this Act shall apply to the vacating, modifying, or correcting of any award entered as a result of an arbitration agreement which is a part of or pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement; and the grounds for vacating, modifying, or correcting such an award shall be those which existed prior to the enactment of this Act.
(Source: P.A. 79-1361.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 196 cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Fed. Signal Corp. v. SLC Tech., Inc., 743 N.E.2d 1066 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fed. Signal Corp. v. SLC Tech., Inc., 743 N.E.2d 1066 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). · cites it 4× “In particular, SLC sought clarification of the following: “What is the basis for the court’s denial of SLC’S motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings? Did the Court determine that the arbitration award is subject to modification or vacation pursuant to 710 ILCS 5/12 or…”
Salsitz v. Kreiss, 761 N.E.2d 724 (Ill. 2001). · cites it 2× “Defendants argued that Salsitz’s and D’Ugo’s claims for breach of contract and fraud were subject to arbitration and moved to dismiss the complaint.”
Yorulmazoglu v. Lake Forest Hosp., 834 N.E.2d 468 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 3× “The basis for defendant’s section 2 — 615 motion was that plaintiff failed to allege any of the statutory grounds for vacating an arbitration award under section 12 of the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12 (West 2002)).”
Spencer v. Ryland Grp. Inc., 865 N.E.2d 301 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 6× “Spencer contends that the arbitrator here exceeded his powers by disregarding the plain language of the sales contract that the "non-prevailing party" would pay "all reasonable costs, 5 No.”
Dep't of Cent. Mgmt. Servs. v. Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, 695 N.E.2d 444 (Ill. 1998). · cites it 4× “The application was predicated on sections 12 and 13 of the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12, 13 (West 1994)). Section 12(b) of the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12(b) (West 1994)) provides that an application to vacate an award “shall be made within 90 days after…”
William Charles Constr. Co. v. Teamsters Local Union 627, 827 F.3d 672 (7th Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “710 ILCS 5/12(b). A failure to challenge an arbitration award within the applicable limitations period renders the award nearly impervious to attack.”
Hawrelak v. Marine Bank, 735 N.E.2d 1066 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). · cites it 4× “710 ILCS 5/12, 13 (West 1998). In particular, the Act allows vacation of an award (1) procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means, (2) where there was evident partiality or misconduct on the part of the arbitrators, (3) where the arbitrators exceeded their powers, or (4)…”
Rosenthal-Collins Grp., L.P. v. Reiff, 748 N.E.2d 229 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). · cites it 3× “2d 1181 (1979), Reiff argues that the standard of review under section 12(a) of the Illinois Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12(a) (West 1998)) is de nova.”
Quick & Reilly, Inc. v. Zielinski, 713 N.E.2d 739 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). · cites it 6× “See 710 ILCS 5/12(a) (West 1996). Petitioners rely on sections 12(a)(2) and (a)(3) of the Illinois Act, [1] which state that a court must vacate or modify an arbitration award where there was evident partiality or misconduct on the part of the arbitrators, thereby prejudicing…”
GPS USA, Inc. v. Performance Powdercoating, 2015 IL App (2d) 131190 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 6× “¶ 19 Section 12 of the Uniform Arbitration Act (Act) (710 ILCS 5/12 (West 2012)) specifies grounds for vacating an arbitration award, stating in relevant part: “(a) Upon application of a party, the court shall vacate an award where: (1) The award was procured by corruption,…”
Painters' Dist. Council No. 30 v. Rock-It Interiors, Inc., 190 F. Supp. 3d 803 (N.D. Ill. 2016). · cites it 3× “1985); 710 ILCS 5/12(b) (a motion to vacate an arbitration award “shall be made within 90 days after delivery of a copy of the award to the applicant”).”
Jenkins v. Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church, 825 N.E.2d 1206 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 2× “If, after arbitration, an application to vacate is made under section 12 of the Act (710 ILCS 5/12 (West 2000)), the trial court shall review the record of the arbitration proceedings to determine if constitutional strictures apply, that is, whether Abatie's remarks fall outside…”
Show all 196 citing cases →
— 710 ILCS 5/12(3) — 3 cases
7-Eleven, Inc. v. Dar, 757 N.E.2d 515 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
Bankers Life & Cas. Ins. v. CBRE, Inc., 830 F.3d 729 (7th Cir. 2016).
7-Eleven, Inc. v. Dar, 748 N.E.2d 642 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(a) — 37 cases
Yorulmazoglu v. Lake Forest Hosp., 834 N.E.2d 468 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “The basis for defendant’s section 2 — 615 motion was that plaintiff failed to allege any of the statutory grounds for vacating an arbitration award under section 12 of the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12 (West 2002)).”
Rosenthal-Collins Grp., L.P. v. Reiff, 748 N.E.2d 229 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “2d 1181 (1979), Reiff argues that the standard of review under section 12(a) of the Illinois Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12(a) (West 1998)) is de nova.”
Sloan Elec. v. Prof'l Realty & Dev. Corp., 819 N.E.2d 37 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004).
Water Pipe Extension v. City of Chicago, 741 N.E.2d 1093 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000).
Spencer v. Ryland Grp. Inc., 865 N.E.2d 301 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “Spencer contends that the arbitrator here exceeded his powers by disregarding the plain language of the sales contract that the "non-prevailing party" would pay "all reasonable costs, 5 No.”
— 710 ILCS 5/12(a)(1) — 14 cases
Tim Huey Corp. v. Global Boiler & Mech., Inc., 649 N.E.2d 1358 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995).
Hawrelak v. Marine Bank, 735 N.E.2d 1066 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). “710 ILCS 5/12, 13 (West 1998). In particular, the Act allows vacation of an award (1) procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means, (2) where there was evident partiality or misconduct on the part of the arbitrators, (3) where the arbitrators exceeded their powers, or (4)…”
Ryan v. Kontrick, 710 N.E.2d 11 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999).
Laatz v. Intergovernmental Risk Mgmt. Agency, 784 N.E.2d 877 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003).
GPS USA, Inc. v. Performance Powdercoating, 2015 IL App (2d) 131190 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(a)(2) — 3 cases
Quick & Reilly, Inc. v. Zielinski, 713 N.E.2d 739 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). “See 710 ILCS 5/12(a) (West 1996). Petitioners rely on sections 12(a)(2) and (a)(3) of the Illinois Act, [1] which state that a court must vacate or modify an arbitration award where there was evident partiality or misconduct on the part of the arbitrators, thereby prejudicing…”
Cerajewski v. Kunkle, 674 N.E.2d 57 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996).
Cerajewski v. Kinkle (Ill. App. Ct. 1996).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(a)(3) — 29 cases
Spencer v. Ryland Grp. Inc., 865 N.E.2d 301 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “Spencer contends that the arbitrator here exceeded his powers by disregarding the plain language of the sales contract that the "non-prevailing party" would pay "all reasonable costs, 5 No.”
Herricane Graphics, Inc. v. Blinderman Constr. Co., 820 N.E.2d 619 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004).
Klehr v. Illinois Farmers Ins. Co., 2013 IL App (1st) 121843 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013).
Quick & Reilly, Inc. v. Zielinski, 713 N.E.2d 739 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). “See 710 ILCS 5/12(a) (West 1996). Petitioners rely on sections 12(a)(2) and (a)(3) of the Illinois Act, [1] which state that a court must vacate or modify an arbitration award where there was evident partiality or misconduct on the part of the arbitrators, thereby prejudicing…”
Perkins Restaurants Operating Co. v. Van Den Bergh Foods Co., 657 N.E.2d 1085 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(a)(4) — 5 cases
Taxman v. First Illinois Bank of Evanston, 782 N.E.2d 803 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002).
Christian Dior, Inc. v. Schaffner & Marx, 637 N.E.2d 546 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994).
Duemer v. Edward T. Joyce & Assocs., P.C., 2013 IL App (1st) 120687 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013).
Tee & Gee Underwriting Managers, Lp v. Am. Millennium Ins. Co. (l-0817-21, Somerset Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2022).
Taxman v. First Illinois Bank of Evanston (Ill. App. Ct. 2002).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(a)(5) — 7 cases
Salsitz v. Kreiss, 761 N.E.2d 724 (Ill. 2001). “Defendants argued that Salsitz’s and D’Ugo’s claims for breach of contract and fraud were subject to arbitration and moved to dismiss the complaint.”
GPS USA, Inc. v. Performance Powdercoating, 2015 IL App (2d) 131190 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “¶ 19 Section 12 of the Uniform Arbitration Act (Act) (710 ILCS 5/12 (West 2012)) specifies grounds for vacating an arbitration award, stating in relevant part: “(a) Upon application of a party, the court shall vacate an award where: (1) The award was procured by corruption,…”
Ne. Illinois Reg'l Commuter R.R. v. Chicago Union Station Co., 832 N.E.2d 214 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005).
GPS USA, Inc. v. Performance Powdercoating, 2015 IL App (2d) 131190 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
Salsitz v. Kreiss Modification of September 20, 2001, Opinion Upon Denial of Rehearing (Ill. 2001).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(a)(l) — 10 cases
Hawrelak v. Marine Bank, 735 N.E.2d 1066 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). “710 ILCS 5/12, 13 (West 1998). In particular, the Act allows vacation of an award (1) procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means, (2) where there was evident partiality or misconduct on the part of the arbitrators, (3) where the arbitrators exceeded their powers, or (4)…”
First Health Grp. Corp. v. Ruddick, 911 N.E.2d 1201 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009).
Colmar Ltd. v. Fremantlemedia North Am., Inc., 801 N.E.2d 1017 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003).
Rosenthal-Collins Grp., L.P. v. Reiff, 748 N.E.2d 229 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “2d 1181 (1979), Reiff argues that the standard of review under section 12(a) of the Illinois Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12(a) (West 1998)) is de nova.”
Casanova v. City of Chicago, 793 N.E.2d 907 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(b) — 41 cases
William Charles Constr. Co. v. Teamsters Local Union 627, 827 F.3d 672 (7th Cir. 2016). “710 ILCS 5/12(b). A failure to challenge an arbitration award within the applicable limitations period renders the award nearly impervious to attack.”
Painters' Dist. Council No. 30 v. Rock-It Interiors, Inc., 190 F. Supp. 3d 803 (N.D. Ill. 2016). “1985); 710 ILCS 5/12(b) (a motion to vacate an arbitration award “shall be made within 90 days after delivery of a copy of the award to the applicant”).”
City of Naperville v. Illinois Fraternal Order of Police, 2013 IL App (2d) 121071 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013).
Marzano v. Cook Cnty. Sheriff's Merit Bd., 920 N.E.2d 1205 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009).
Kenny v. Kenny Indus., Inc., 951 N.E.2d 499 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(c) — 5 cases
Advocate Fin. Grp. v. Poulos, 2014 IL App (2d) 130670 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014).
7-Eleven, Inc. v. Dar, 757 N.E.2d 515 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
7-Eleven, Inc. v. Dar, 748 N.E.2d 642 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
Trimble v. Graves, 947 N.E.2d 885 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Trimble v. Graves (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(d) — 6 cases
Dep't of Cent. Mgmt. Servs. v. Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, 695 N.E.2d 444 (Ill. 1998). “The application was predicated on sections 12 and 13 of the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12, 13 (West 1994)). Section 12(b) of the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12(b) (West 1994)) provides that an application to vacate an award “shall be made within 90 days after…”
Taxman v. First Illinois Bank of Evanston, 782 N.E.2d 803 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002).
7-Eleven, Inc. v. Dar, 842 N.E.2d 260 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005).
Vega Asset Recovery LLC v. Newedge USA, LLC (N.D. Ill. 2019).
Taxman v. First Illinois Bank of Evanston (Ill. App. Ct. 2002).
— 710 ILCS 5/12(e) — 25 cases
Glass, Molders, Pottery, Plastics & Allied Workers Int'l Union, Afl-Cio, Clc, Local 182b v. Excelsior Foundry Co., 56 F.3d 844 (7th Cir. 1995).
Dep't of Cent. Mgmt. Servs. v. Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, 695 N.E.2d 444 (Ill. 1998). “The application was predicated on sections 12 and 13 of the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12, 13 (West 1994)). Section 12(b) of the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/12(b) (West 1994)) provides that an application to vacate an award “shall be made within 90 days after…”
Water Pipe Extension v. City of Chicago, 741 N.E.2d 1093 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000).
City of Des Plaines v. Metro. All. of Police Chapter No. 240, 2015 IL App (1st) 140957 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
Sullivan v. Lemoncello, 36 F.3d 676 (7th Cir. 1994).
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.