Originally from The Law and Practice of International Arbitration: Essays in Honor of John Fellas – Preview Page

1. INTRODUCTION 

The core duty of an international arbitrator is to provide parties with a dispute resolution process that is both fair and efficient. This is what parties expect and deserve. Yet there is constant criticism of international arbitration, with “[t]ime and cost… perennially acknowledged as the biggest concerns.”2  

There are many reasons why both the average length and cost of an international arbitration have grown over the last three decades or so, and arbitrators are not to blame for all—or even most—of them. However, among the various participants in the arbitral process, it is arbitrators who are best placed to address the problem.3 Arbitrators have the requisite power—and indeed the duty—to do so by proactively steering each individual case to ensure fairness with maximum efficiency. “Proactive” is the key word. A tribunal acting on “autopilot” or “sitting there like a potted plant” until forced to engage is bound to lose control over the proceeding, if it ever achieves it.4 Similarly, a tribunal paralyzed by the familiar phenomenon of due process paranoia cannot act decisively to curb delay tactics and push counsel to act efficiently.  

In this essay in honor of John Fellas—an arbitrator celebrated for his proactive approach, we follow Plato’s observation that “the beginning is the most important part of the work.” The “beginning” here is Procedural Order No. 1. This is because it is this document that provides the initial directions that shape the entire arbitral process. Our goal in writing is to identify active case management tools that may be included in Procedural Order No. 1 to lay the foundation for tribunal engagement in the proceeding from start to finish, emphasizing appropriate efficiency at every stage.