In contrast to the standard litigation procedure, where the parties have very limited abilities to affect the appointment of a certain judge, the arbitration allows the parties to nominate the desired person to finally settle their dispute. Hence, the parties can be assured that the person who is entrusted to decide on the outcome of their case is indeed a subject matter expert.
Although appointing one arbitrator provides for lower costs and a swift procedure, in some situations the parties may not be able to come to an agreement regarding who that arbitrator will be. In that case, a widespread solution is that each party will nominate one arbitrator, and then, those two will designate the third arbitrator. That foresees greater impartiality and distributes the burden of the decision-making process between the arbitrators equally.
There are no restrictions regarding the number of arbitrators involved but the arbitration fees proportionally rise with every additional arbitrator. Therefore, it is not common to appoint more than three arbitrators, even in more complex cases.
No specific qualifications are required for being an arbitrator. Usually, the parties will nominate a senior attorney, a judge, or a law professor. It is recommendable that parties choose the arbitrator who is a legal specialist, considering that an arbitration award has the same legal force as a court’s decision, and the same general legal principles apply to it. However, if the dispute is related to the provision of services in the IT industry, the parties may agree to appoint an IT expert and/or a business consultant to join the arbitral panel as well.