Arbitrators Appointments

Home / Practices / Arbitrators Appointments
All practices
ArbitrationProcedure

Arbitrator appointments often decide the case before the first hearing, so we build your selection strategy and run the nomination process to put qualified, well-suited decision-makers on your tribunal.

Who sits on your tribunal can matter as much as the merits, because arbitrators bring their own judgment, pace, and view of the law to every ruling. We help you identify, vet, and appoint arbitrators who will give your dispute a fair, efficient, and informed hearing, and we manage the appointment process so deadlines and procedural rules never work against you.

Building a Selection Strategy

Picking an arbitrator is a strategic decision, not a name off a list. We study the shape of your case, your counterparty's likely positions, and the procedural posture, then match those factors to arbitrators whose background and tendencies fit. We weigh substantive expertise, industry and technical fluency, real availability, and how a candidate has handled similar issues, so the panel that hears your case is equipped to understand it.

Vetting and Disclosure Checks

Before any nomination, we run a hard look at independence and conflicts. We review prior appointments, published decisions, professional relationships, and any ties to the parties or counsel that could support a challenge later. Catching a disclosure problem early protects the integrity of the award and keeps your counterparty from using a conflict to unwind a result you have already won.

Managing the Appointment Process

The mechanics of constituting a tribunal carry their own traps, from party-appointment rules to the selection of a presiding arbitrator and institutional confirmation steps. We track every deadline, prepare your nominations, and handle correspondence with the institution and opposing counsel. When the parties cannot agree on a chair, we advance candidates who serve your interests and respond quickly to default-appointment procedures.

Frequently asked questions

It depends on the rules, but the common pattern is that each side nominates one arbitrator, and those two then pick the presiding arbitrator. If the parties or the co-arbitrators cannot agree, the arbitral institution makes the appointment.

Look for knowledge of the subject matter, the right language skills, real availability to handle your case, and a track record of fairness and efficiency. Depending on the dispute, nationality and prior arbitration experience can matter too. Above all, the arbitrator must be free of conflicts with the parties or the dispute.

You can challenge an arbitrator for lacking impartiality or independence, or for not meeting the qualifications the parties agreed to. The procedure depends on the institution, but you generally have to act promptly once you learn of the grounds, so do not sit on a problem.

The presiding arbitrator chairs the tribunal, runs the procedural side of the case, and often carries significant weight in the deliberations. Because of that influence, choosing the presiding arbitrator is frequently the most consequential appointment decision in the whole arbitration.

A sole arbitrator is faster and cheaper, which suits smaller or simpler disputes. A three-member tribunal brings more perspectives, lets each side take part in the selection, and allows for fuller deliberation, which is usually worth it for complex or high-value cases.

Our team

People in this practice

Document products

Related document products

Order attorney-drafted documents related to this practice.

Browse all products

Bring our arbitrators appointments team to your next matter.

Get in touch