Originally from World Arbitration And Mediation Review (WAMR)

Preview Page

Comment

INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION FROM THE
CORPORATE PERSPECTIVE

Elpidio ("PD") Villarreal*

I. INTRODUCTION

My purpose is to give a corporate perspective on the
contemplated changes to the arbitration system in the United
States. Actually, it is not that difficult a job because, to the extent
that this is on the radar screen of corporate counsel (and it is not
on the radar screen of all corporate counsel), the sentiment is
essentially uniform that this is a very bad idea, and that the notion
of making significant, potentially far-reaching changes to the
arbitration system in this country is untimely and completely
unnecessary. Whether this is a good idea looks very different
depending on your perspective, I suppose. But as someone whose
job it is to defend the global litigation risk challenges of a large
multinational corporation, this does not look like a particularly
good idea. There is growing opposition within corporate circles,
chambers of commerce, and other legal reform groups. Over the
coming months, they will be mounting a challenge to some of the
more far-reaching aspects of the legislative bills that are under
consideration.

From a corporate perspective , arbitration in this country has
had its shortcomings and critics. But all those shortcomings pale
in comparison to the shortcomings of litigation, and not just for
corporate defendants like GlaxoSmithKline ("GSK"), my client, but
really also for plaintiffs. The notion that the choice is between an
arbitration system that is unfair to plaintiffs versus a litigation
system that is paradise for plaintiffs is, I think, naïve. My own
sense is that, in fact, the current litigation system is not all that