The Parties' Contract with the Arbitration Institution - Chapter 35 - Between East and West: Essays in Honour of Ulf Franke
Christer Söderlund is a Partner with the Vinge law firm, Stockholm and a former member of the Board of the SCC Institute. He serves as an arbitrator and has been appointed by the Swedish Government to the ICSID Panel of Arbitrators.
Originally from Between East and West: Essays in Honour of Ulf Franke
There can be no doubt that the SCC Institute has enjoyed remarkable success-- particularly in the last ten, fifteen years--in terms of recognition by the business community. This remarkable success is in large measure due to the SCC Institute's General Secretary of long standing, Ulf Franke, who, by a unique combination of flair, wisdom, energy, and efficiency, has managed the development of the institution's dispute resolution services to meet the changing and increasing demands from parties in quest of efficient dispute resolution services, particularly in the international realm. In this connection it may be allowed to offer some views on the relationship between parties seeking institutional support for their dispute resolution needs and the arbitral institutions, a subject not often subject to discussion.
II. THE ROLE OF THE ARBITRAL INSTITUTION
Arbitral institutions are service providers. However, they are not business enterprises in any stricter sense, and, in fact, their operations do, as a rule, only break even at best. Already for this reason, no arbitral institution is operated for the sole purpose of profit. Instead, they are normally part of--or are in themselves--something that could be classified as NGOs. The SCC Institute, for instance, is an integral part of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, although independently managed. The ICC is an integral part of the International Chamber of Commerce. LCIA is an independent institution.
It is reasonable that arbitration institutions should appear in this form: They do not represent enticing business propositions. The indispensable requirements for such an institution of permanence, stability, and resilience against short-termism, make this necessary. Arbitral institutions are normally of a venerable age--ICC in Paris started its dispute resolution services in 1923, LCIA in London is the evolution of a dispute resolution service that was initiated way back at the beginning of the last century and the SCC Institute in Stockholm has been providing facilities for dispute resolution since more than seventy years ago (although it is only in the last thirty years that its dispute resolution services have picked up speed).