ACR-GNY - Enhanced Arbitrator Selection Process for Large Complex Cases

Log in

Home
Learn
Resolution Roundtable Blog
Enhanced Arbitrator Selection Process for Large Complex Cases
Add comment

Enhanced Arbitrator Selection Process for Large Complex Cases

Wednesday, November 19, 2025 12:08 PM | Anonymous

Finra Proposes Tweaks to Arbitrator Selection - AdvisorHub

Some arbitration institutions offer an enhanced arbitrator selection process for selecting arbitrators for large complex cases. The process allows for the parties to establish protocols for interviewing potential arbitrators via oral or written questions. What are the best practices (protocols) for an enhanced arbitrator selection process? Why is the process not widely used by parties? Do you see any potential problems with such a process?

What are your thoughts?

Add comment

Comments

Wednesday, November 19, 2025 3:22 PM | Robert L. Arrington

I have been interviewed and answered written questions before. It's not necessary in most cases but undergoing it has never offended me.

Link • Reply
- Wednesday, November 19, 2025 3:26 PM | Mark Bunim
  
  When I am a wing arbitrator and the first task is to select a Chair along with the other wing, I have found zoom interviews of an agreed upon number of candidates to be extremely helpful. In some instances, the two wings agree upon a select set of questions in advance.
  
  Link • Reply
- Wednesday, November 19, 2025 3:29 PM | Howard Sobel
  
  Often there are questions from both sides that are not addressed in the potential arbitrator's resume (before selection). Providing a set of questions for each potential arbitrator helps to provide valuable information in the selection process.
  
  Link • Reply
  
  Author
  
  * Comment
Wednesday, November 19, 2025 3:33 PM | Gary Benton

Actually, arbitrator interviews in international and complex commercial cases are on the rise - and it's a great tool to help parties select the right arbitrators. There are already established guidelines from the IBA and CIArb that require focus on arbitrator credentials, experience and availability - and preclude discussion of the merits. It's typically a conversation - and providers are rarely involved in the process.

Link • Reply
Wednesday, November 19, 2025 3:50 PM | Jack Levin

I join my colleagues in recommending direct communication with potential arbitrators. Of course, these exchanges must be within accepted subject matter limits. In my experience, counsel are familiar with the guidelines and confine themselves to exploring experience without getting into the details or outcomes of specific matters. Interviews can be especially helpful in informing counsel about a candidate's personality and ability to manage cases, which is especially important in large complex matters.

Link • Reply
Wednesday, November 19, 2025 4:07 PM | David E. Robbins

While arbitrators serve at the contractual pleasure of the parties, I am concerned about party-potential arbitrator communications since the former would be sizing p the latter as a potential advocate for its side. "What's your feeling about ..." Parties should have a level of comfort that the arbitrator is experienced in the kinds of disputes at issue but without giving any indication how the arbitrator leans on those issues. The arbitrator, on the other hand ,"wants the gig." He/she may want to give the impression about his/her opinion on certain issues. All in all, it's the proverbial slippery slope, I'm afraid.

Link • Reply
- Wednesday, November 19, 2025 4:20 PM | Jack Levin
  
  Those are exactly the kinds of things that must not be discussed. People know where the slope is. If I was dealing with counsel who wanted me to go there, that might be a warning sign. Counsel can ask, but the arbitrator does not have to answer. I have turned down assignments because I did not have confidence in counsel.
  
  Link • Reply
  - Wednesday, November 19, 2025 8:33 PM | Peter Rundle
    
    Well-said.
    
    Link • Reply