That there is a general preference for three-member tribunals in international arbitration cannot be gainsaid. Conventional wisdom has it that having three arbitrators as opposed to only one helps to improve the quality of the proceedings and the ultimate award, and increases party confidence in the arbitral process. This article examines the conventional wisdom on the benefits of having three arbitrators, and specifically questions whether having party-nominated co-arbitrators generally improves quality or reasonably increases party confidence. The article also proposes ways in which party-nominated co-arbitrators might be selected to better serve both the tribunals on which they sit and the parties that nominate them.
Journal of International Arbitration