An arbitrator-selection provision was held unenforceable because it gave the defendant’s agent “sole discretion” to select an arbitration service to resolve a dispute.  Nishimura v. Gentry Homes, Ltd., No. SCWC-13-0000137 (Haw. Oct. 31, 2014).  Adopting a “fundamental fairness” standard to review pre-arbitration challenges to the arbitration-selection process, the court concluded that a provision that gives one party unilateral control over the pool of potential arbitrators prevents arbitration from being an effective substitute for a judicial forum because it inherently lacks neutrality.  This standard does not require a party to show actual bias on the part of a particular arbitrator to invalidate the arbitrator-selection provision.