Arbitration: the Need for Speed – Balancing Efficiency and Due Process

In an era where time and cost pressures dominate dispute resolution, arbitration faces growing demands for speed. But how do we accelerate proceedings without undermining fairness and due process? This session explores practical solutions and emerging trends in fast-track arbitration, technology-driven case management, and streamlined expert evidence. We’ll examine institutional reforms, procedural innovations, and the role of tribunals and parties in achieving efficiency while safeguarding integrity. 

Each of the below integral roles in arbitration outline what makes arbitration slow from their respective view points and how to reduce costs by making it faster.

Arbitrator’s Perspective

Why Arbitration Slows Down:

• Multiple procedural steps and party-driven delays.
• Overly complex case management orders.
• Hesitation to enforce strict timelines for fear of due process challenges.

How to Make It Faster & Reduce Costs:

• Adopt proactive case management and enforce deadlines firmly.
• Use procedural conferences to streamline issues early.
• Embrace technology (virtual hearings, e-bundles) to cut logistical delays.
• Consider bifurcation or summary disposal for clear-cut issues.

Counsel’s Perspective

Why Arbitration Slows Down:

• Extensive document production requests.
• Tactical delays (e.g., late submissions, procedural objections).
• Overly detailed pleadings and duplication of arguments.

How to Make It Faster & Reduce Costs:

• Focus on core issues and avoid unnecessary complexity.
• Agree on limited disclosure protocols upfront.
• Use joint expert reports or hot-tubbing to reduce duplication.
• Prepare lean submissions and leverage technology for case presentation.

Expert’s Perspective

Why Arbitration Slows Down:

• Late appointment of experts, leading to rushed or incomplete analysis.
• Excessive scope creep in expert reports.
• Disputes over methodology and data access.

How to Make It Faster & Reduce Costs:

• Engage experts early in the process to identify key delay drivers.
• Use agreed methodologies and common data sets to avoid disputes.
• Consider joint expert meetings and concurrent evidence sessions.
• Deliver clear, concise reports focused on tribunal needs.