- 14-Jun-2025
- Elder & Estate Planning law
The appointment of arbitrators in international arbitration is a crucial step in ensuring that the dispute resolution process is fair, efficient, and impartial. The process typically involves multiple parties, including the disputing parties, arbitral institutions, and sometimes even courts. Understanding the rules and mechanisms that govern arbitrator appointments helps ensure that disputes are handled by qualified and neutral professionals.
In most international arbitrations, the parties themselves have the primary responsibility for selecting arbitrators. This is in line with the principle of party autonomy, which allows the parties to agree on the number of arbitrators, their qualifications, and the method of appointment. The parties typically:
In many cases, parties agree to have their arbitration administered by an arbitral institution. Institutions like the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), or American Arbitration Association (AAA) play a significant role in the appointment process. They ensure that the selection follows the agreed-upon rules, and if the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator, the institution may step in and make the appointment on their behalf. The process typically involves:
Courts may become involved in the appointment process when parties fail to appoint arbitrators within the prescribed timeframe or cannot reach an agreement. National courts can step in under Article 11 of the UNCITRAL Model Law (adopted in many jurisdictions) or corresponding provisions in domestic arbitration laws, such as Section 11 of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Courts can appoint one or more arbitrators when the parties:
The court's role is to ensure that the arbitration can proceed by appointing an arbitrator in line with the agreement and applicable rules.
In ad hoc arbitration (where no arbitral institution is involved), the parties agree on the rules and process for selecting arbitrators. If the parties fail to appoint arbitrators, national courts will typically step in to make the appointments. Ad hoc arbitrations are governed by the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules or other agreed procedural rules, and the court appointment is made under local law, which may be similar to the process in institutional arbitration.
In international arbitration, the process is designed to ensure that the arbitrators are neutral and independent. Parties often select arbitrators based on:
If the parties agree on arbitrators, they may each nominate one arbitrator, and the two selected arbitrators will jointly appoint the third (chairperson).
In some cases, an appointing authority (an arbitral institution or a court) may make the appointment if the parties fail to agree.
If a party believes that an appointed arbitrator is biased or lacks the necessary qualifications, they may challenge the appointment. Most arbitration rules allow parties to challenge an arbitrator’s appointment for reasons such as a conflict of interest or lack of independence.
Institutions like the ICC have clear procedures for the removal of an arbitrator, and national courts can also intervene to remove an arbitrator in extreme cases.
The appointment process generally follows strict timelines to ensure that the arbitration proceeds efficiently. If the process takes too long, parties can request the court or the arbitral institution to intervene.
Imagine two companies—one from Japan and the other from Brazil—enter into a commercial contract that includes an arbitration clause stipulating that disputes will be resolved by 3 arbitrators under LCIA rules. The companies agree to select their own arbitrators, but they cannot reach an agreement on the chairperson.
The Japanese company nominates an arbitrator from Japan, and the Brazilian company nominates an arbitrator from Brazil.
The two nominated arbitrators are unable to agree on the chairperson. Under the LCIA rules, they approach the LCIA Court to appoint a third arbitrator (the chairperson).
If the two arbitrators still cannot agree on the chairperson, the LCIA Court steps in and appoints the chairperson from its roster of qualified arbitrators, ensuring neutrality and subject-matter expertise.
If one party challenges the appointment of an arbitrator, the LCIA Court or a national court may intervene to resolve the dispute and ensure the arbitration continues.
The process of appointing arbitrators in international arbitration is designed to ensure that disputes are heard by qualified, impartial, and independent professionals. While parties have significant autonomy in selecting arbitrators, arbitral institutions and courts play crucial roles in ensuring that the process remains fair and efficient, particularly when parties cannot agree or when challenges arise.
Answer By Law4u Team
Discover clear and detailed answers to common questions about public international law. Learn about procedures and more in straightforward language.
