Global Survey Reveals Corporate Choices in International Arbitration
This week sees the results of a major survey on international arbitration by the School of International Arbitration at Queen Mary, University of London, sponsored by global law firm White & Case LLP.
The survey, entitled "Choices in International Arbitration" considers the key factors that influence corporate choices about international arbitration: how decisions are made about arbitration, who influences these decisions and what considerations are uppermost in the minds of corporate counsel when they negotiate arbitration clauses.
The main findings of the 2010 survey are:
Choice of law governing the substance of the dispute, the seat of arbitration and arbitration institution: 40% of respondents use English law most frequently, followed by 17% who use New York law. Choice of seat is mostly influenced by "formal legal infrastructure", the law governing the contract and convenience. London is the most preferred seat of arbitration (30%), followed by Geneva (9%), Paris, Tokyo and Singapore (each 7%) and New York (6%). Respondents have the most negative perception of Moscow and Mainland China as seats of arbitration.
The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) is the most preferred and widely used arbitration institution (50%), although there was a perception amongst a majority of interviewees that ICC arbitration is too expensive and that arbitration institutions in general are costly. Respondents have the most negative perception of Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (CRCICA), Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC).
Policies about arbitration: 68% of corporations have a dispute resolution policy. Whether or not they have a policy, corporations generally take a reasonably flexible approach to negotiating arbitration clauses. They have strong preferences regarding confidentiality and language and reasonably strong preferences regarding governing law and seat.
Selecting arbitrators: 50% of respondents have been disappointed with arbitrator performance. The top scoring reasons for this were "a bad decision or outcome" (scoring 20% based on a weighted percentage), followed by excessive flexibility or failure to control the process (scoring 12%). Next was arbitrator caused delays (score of 11%), followed by poor reasoning in the award and lack of arbitrator knowledge and expertise in the subject matter of the dispute (both scored 9%).
Arbitrator tardiness in rendering the award scored 8%. Lack of independence, bias and awarding oneself excessive fees were also other concerns expressed by respondents.
Confidentiality: 50% of respondents erroneously believe that arbitration is confidential even where there is no specific clause to that effect in the arbitration rules adopted or the arbitration agreement, and a further 12% did not know whether arbitration is confidential in these circumstances.
Time and delay: Disclosure of documents, written submissions, constitution of the tribunal and hearings are the main stages of the arbitral process that continue to suffer from delay.
"This year's research adds to our 2006 and 2008 studies and confirms that global corporations are becoming increasingly sophisticated in their understanding and use of arbitration", commented Professor Loukas Mistelis, Director of the School of International Arbitration at Queen Mary.
"It shows that corporations exercise strong preferences regarding the law that governs disputes and London comes out as a clear winner as the preferred seat of arbitration, which is consistent with our last two surveys. The questionnaire responses and the interviews we conducted also indicated that Singapore and SIAC emerged as increasingly important regional options in Asia, a significant finding for companies operating in the region", he continued.
This year's survey has a significantly larger, and a more geographically diverse sample, than the previous two surveys with an unprecedented 67 in-depth interviews and 136 questionnaire responses.
"The 2010 survey provides significant insight, unavailable until now, into the choices that corporate counsel make in relation to the use of international arbitration. Choice of law is shown to be a determinant of choice of dispute resolution mechanism (including place of arbitration and arbitral institution). This may surprise some in our field and has an impact on predicting future trends in international arbitration", commented Phillip Capper, London head of White & Case’s International Arbitration group.
About the School of International Arbitration
The School of International Arbitration (SIA) is a centre of excellence in research and teaching of international arbitration and is part of the Centre for Commercial Law Studies (CCLS) at Queen Mary, University of London. The School was established in 1985 to promote advanced teaching and research in the law and practice affecting international arbitration. Today SIA is widely acknowledged as the leading teaching and research centre on international arbitration in the world. SIA offers a range of international arbitration courses including: specialist LLM modules, postgraduate diplomas, professional courses and training and one of the largest specialist PhD programmes in the world. The leading research centre in Europe, and arguably the world, on the subject of International Arbitration and Litigation, the School also conducts unique empirical studies, the most recent of which with the financial support of White & Case LLP in 2010.
The 2010 International Arbitration survey results can be found at: http://www.arbitrationonline.org/research/2010/index.html
About White & Case
White & Case LLP is a leading global law firm with 36 offices in 25 countries. Among the first US-based law firms to establish a truly global presence, we provide counsel and representation in virtually every area of law that affects cross-border business. Our clients value both the breadth of our global network and depth of our US, English and local law capabilities in each of our regions and rely on us for their complex cross-border transactions, arbitration and litigation provided by our global practices.
White & Case International Arbitration Group
The International Arbitration group at White & Case is widely recognised as pre-eminent in its field. With 150 practitioners in offices around the world, we advise clients operating under virtually any substantive law and in both common and civil law systems. We have extensive experience working with all major arbitral institutions and rules, and our lawyers are experienced dispute resolution specialists in sectors such as aerospace, construction, defence, energy, financial services, hospitality, information technology, infrastructure, manufacturing, media, mining, oil and gas, pharmaceuticals, power, real estate, telecommunications, transport and in cases for and against states.
To view the survey results, click here.
For media information, contact:Paul Jordan
Faculty Communications Manager (HSS)