The Organisation of International Arbitration Proceedings - Chapter 7 - Asian Leading Arbitrators' Guide to International Arbitration
Philip Yang has been involved in international arbitration for over 30 years and practiced as a full time arbitrator for the past 15 years. Mr. Yang was the Chairman of the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) from March 2004 to March 2007 and currently the President of the Asia Pacific Regional Arbitration Group (APRAG). Mr Yang is also a Fractional Professor at the City University of Hong Kong and an Adjunct Professor at the University of Hong Kong, teaching arbitration law and practice.
Originally from Asian Leading Arbitrators' Guide to International Arbitration
It is often claimed that one major advantage of international arbitration is the flexibility in the conduct of proceedings over national court litigation. After all, every case differs and it is wrong to conduct every one of them in a standard set of arbitral proceedings. Even for institutional arbitration which has rules to follow, most of them are worded in very general terms (*for example, ICC Arbitration Rules in Art.20  said “The Arbitral Tribunal … to establish the facts of the case by all appropriate means”; The LCIA Arbitration Rules in Art.14.2 said: “the Arbitral Tribunal shall have the widest discretion to discharge its duties...”), leaving much flexibility to the largely unfettered discretion of the arbitrators. With ad hoc arbitration, the flexibility in arbitral proceedings is even greater. But flexibility can have disadvantages. An important one is the unpredictability or uncertainty. It is especially so if the parties and their legal representatives are going before an unfamiliar international tribunal (which often happens), as it can render every application in arbitral proceedings a guessing game.
A. Importance of Arbitral Proceedings
We know it is important to win the war (which is the award on substantive dispute) and not every battle (which is the interlocutory decisions in arbitral proceedings). But the outcome of the war may depend on one or more crucial battles fought out during the interlocutory stage. Such as, whether or not to order security for costs or the production of certain documents.