In the absence of concrete publicly available information about arbitrators, arbitration practitioners often resort to cognitive shortcuts and just plain guesswork in the arbitrator selection process.
Arbitrators make many decisions that affect the outcome of a case. The most obvious decisions are, of course, their decisions on the merits. But arbitrators also make a host of other procedural and case management decisions that can affect the outcome of a case.
In most cases, arbitrator selection follows a basic 3-step process: 1) Start with a Long List of Potential Arbitrators; 2) Pare it down to a Short List of Suitable Arbitrators; and then 3) Pick The Arbitrator to appoint.
In recent years, a range of organizations have sprung up to challenge the existing hegemony in arbitrator appointments. As an opening gambit, ArbitralWomen pushed to have arbitral institutions...
Intra-EU jurisdictional challenges have become a common feature of ISDS proceedings between EU Member States. To date, none of the over 90 known objections raised on this basis was successful.
The legal industry has benefited tremendously from recent technological advancements, leading to the expansion of Legal Tech as the driving force for progress in this field. More and more tools – more or less Artificial Intelligence...
Founder and CEO Catherine Rogers has been invited to deliver an ‘Update on Arbitrator Intelligence’ at the forthcoming 'Dispute Resolution in the Digital Economy' Workshop, featuring Japan's Proposal on Stocktaking of Dispute Resolution in the Modern Context.
As part of its Latam Campaign, Arbitrator Intelligence (AI) recently co-organized the second chapter of the ECUVYAP series “Behind the Scenes”, with the theme “Selection of the Arbitration Tribunal”. The event began with the welcome to the attendees by Catherine Rogers, the founder and CEO of AI. She talked about the disparity of information while selecting arbitrators, and the tools created by AI to reverse it. With the Reports and Arbitrator Analyzer, a boutique law firm can learn about an arbitrator’s awards, and their previous relationship with the other party or with the rest of the tribunal, in the same way as firms with unlimited resources do.
“To disclose or not to disclose?” no longer seems to be a question for international arbitrators. The narrative and policy space surrounding the independence and impartiality of international arbitrators has been consistently driven towards maximum disclosure obligations.
As part of its Latam Campaign, Arbitrator Intelligence (AI) recently co-organized the second chapter of the ECUVYAP series “Behind the Scenes”, with the theme “Selection of the Arbitration Tribunal”. The event began with the welcome to the attendees by Catherine Rogers, the founder and CEO of AI. She talked about the disparity of information while selecting arbitrators, and the tools created by AI to reverse it. With the Reports and Arbitrator Analyzer, a boutique law firm can learn about an arbitrator’s awards, and their previous relationship with the other party or with the rest of the tribunal, in the same way as firms with unlimited resources do.
