MELTING THE DISPUTES ICEBERG – JUST, QUICK AND CHEAP
Time, cost and efficiency are users’ main concerns with dispute resolution systems. If we needed confirmation, it was provided by the Queen Mary University-White & Case ‘2018 International Arbitration Survey: The Evolution of International Arbitration’. To cope with those concerns, an increasing number of in-house counsel are resorting to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in combination with arbitration or litigation. They hope that a swifter and more cost-efficient resolution can be found before having to institute formal proceedings.
Two innovations favoured by a solid number of the survey participants were expedited procedures and summary determination. The survey results showed good support for both, with 20 to 30 percent of participants in four industries finding the measures attractive. In the banking and finance industry, 28 percent favoured expedited procedures and 30 percent favoured summary determination. In the construction and infrastructure industry, 25 percent favoured expedited procedures and 26 percent favoured summary determination. In the energy industry, 20 percent favoured expedited procedures and 21 percent favoured summary determination. In the technology industry, 27 percent favoured expedited procedures and 24 percent favoured summary determination.
This reflects the type of disputes often found in those industries where, for various reasons, neither party wants to commence lengthy, costly, uncertain formal proceedings but they need the issue resolved. Reasons parties do not commence proceedings can be that costs would outweigh the amount in dispute, the outcome is too uncertain to justify the expense, proceedings would jeopardise an important relationship, the parties are unfamiliar with the disputes process, they do not want to create a litigious reputation, they want to avoid publicity, or simply because of a corporate culture that avoids formal confrontation.
Oct-Dec 2019 issue
Squire Patton Boggs