Clear Path or Jungle in Commercial Arbitrators' Conflict of Interest?

Abstract

In arbitral proceedings, objections and challenges related to arbitrators'conflicts of interest can readily escalate into acrimony. Moreover, the alleged fear of bias has engendered a veritable jungle of rules and guidelines, complicating and even undermining the process. In this book's innovative approach to this thorny subject, prominent specialists representing three stakeholding groups—users, institutions, and state courts—impart firsthand information on their respective practices and policies concerning arbitration, and then proceed to recommend promising paths to harmonizing guidelines and establishing clear and reasonable criteria. Drawing on papers presented at a conference sponsored by the Swiss Arbitration Association (ASA), the contributions respond in depth to such questions as the following: How much independence and impartiality do users seek? What are users expecting and to what extent do expectations differ with regard to the users'own arbitrator, the arbitrator appointed by the opponent, and the chairperson? In what ways can party-appointed arbitrators impact independence and impartiality? When and why should an arbitrator be challenged? How much uniformity exists among the various sets of institutional rules and guidelines, relating in particular to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal? Contributors come from a representative range of major commercial jurisdictions, including England, France, Germany, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States. With its deeply informed, practice-based views from users, arbitral institutions, major jurisdictions, and practitioners, this remarkably thorough overview of arbitrators'conflicts of interest will facilitate informed choice of jurisdictions and arbitral institutions for users and assist arbitrators in ascertaining their disclosure obligations. It will be highly valued by corporate counsel, arbitral institutions, arbitrators, judges, and academics interested in international arbitration.