What this guide covers
The arbitrator is the single most important variable in an arbitration proceeding. A well-chosen arbitrator manages the case efficiently, understands the legal and technical issues, and commands the confidence of both parties. Arbitrator selection is too important to approach without a strategic framework.
Core selection criteria
Legal expertise: Match the arbitrator's legal background to the applicable law and dispute type. For DIAC arbitrations under UAE law: look for arbitrators with UAE commercial law expertise, ideally UAE-qualified or with significant UAE practice. For SIAC or DIFC-seated arbitrations under English law: English-qualified or English common law experienced arbitrators. For construction disputes: arbitrators with FIDIC and construction contract expertise. For financial disputes: banking, finance, or corporate M&A specialists.
Technical knowledge: In technically intensive disputes (engineering, quantum, valuation), having at least one tribunal member with relevant technical background speeds proceedings, reduces expert costs, and often produces better awards. A former construction project director as technical arbitrator on a delay and disruption claim is often more valuable than a third pure lawyer.
Availability: Arbitrators with 20+ active references cannot give adequate time to each case. Check availability before nominating — ask directly: "Do you have capacity to serve as arbitrator in a proceeding expected to require a 10-day hearing in Q4 2027?" A "yes" from a well-credentialed but overloaded arbitrator is less valuable than a "yes" from a slightly less famous but focused practitioner.
Procedural style: Some arbitrators are highly interventionist — they ask questions, require specific procedural formats, and actively manage the case. Others are passive and follow the parties' lead. Neither style is universally better — it depends on the dispute. For document-heavy commercial disputes, an interventionist arbitrator can significantly reduce hearing length.
Conflict-of-interest checks
Before nominating an arbitrator, conduct a thorough conflict check: (i) Has the candidate previously acted as counsel or arbitrator for either party or their affiliates? (ii) Is the candidate employed by, or have a financial interest in, any firm involved in the dispute? (iii) Has the candidate recently published opinions on the legal issues in dispute that could compromise impartiality? (iv) Does the candidate have social or professional relationships with key party representatives that could affect perceived impartiality?
The IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration (2014, updated 2024) are the standard reference. The Guidelines categorise relationships in three lists: Red (automatic disqualification); Orange (disclosure required, may be waiveable); Green (no conflict regardless of relationship). Arbitrators are required to disclose any relationship within the Orange list at the time of appointment. Failure to disclose a material relationship can be grounds for challenge and later award set-aside.
The nomination process in practice
In a three-member tribunal: each party nominates one co-arbitrator; the two co-arbitrators jointly agree on the presiding arbitrator (or the institution appoints if no agreement within the agreed timeframe). Party-nominated co-arbitrators are confirmed by the institution — institutions reject nominees with obvious conflicts or insufficient qualifications.
Practical points: (i) Do not treat the party-nominated co-arbitrator as your "representative" — a co-arbitrator who is overtly partisan will damage your case, not help it; an obviously biased arbitrator will be overruled 2:1 on every issue; (ii) the presiding arbitrator is typically more important than the co-arbitrators in terms of case management and final award quality — invest most of your selection effort in the presiding arbitrator; (iii) for sole arbitrator appointments (expedited proceedings), the single arbitrator is even more critical — request that the institution provide you with 3 candidate profiles for your review before appointment if the rules permit.
Practical checklist
- Due diligence: check the candidate's published awards (some are public), recent appointments list, and any disclosed challenge history
- Sector match: for technical disputes, nominate at least one arbitrator with direct sector expertise on the three-member tribunal
- Availability confirmation: request written confirmation of availability before nomination
- IBA Guidelines conflict check: run the Orange List systematically — call the candidate directly if there are ambiguous relationships
- Presiding arbitrator: invest most effort in identifying and agreeing the presiding arbitrator — this person will write the award
- Institution confirmation: check that the institution's rules allow party nomination and understand the confirmation timeline
What we'd typically advise
We maintain a working list of preferred arbitrators for different dispute types and jurisdictions, updated based on our experience in completed cases. An arbitrator who produces well-reasoned, well-structured awards efficiently is worth recommending again — and worth instructing the opposing party to accept — even if they occasionally rule against us. The integrity of the proceeding matters more than trying to "stack" the tribunal.
Frequently asked questions
Can a party challenge an arbitrator after the proceedings have commenced?
Yes. Challenges must be filed promptly — most institutional rules require challenge within 15–30 days of learning the facts giving rise to the challenge. Delayed challenges are generally inadmissible. The challenge is decided by the institution (not the challenged arbitrator). Groundless challenges are rejected and may result in adverse cost consequences.
Is there an advantage to nominating a "neutral" arbitrator (no relationship to either party)?
Genuinely neutral co-arbitrators tend to be more persuasive in deliberations — a visibly partisan co-arbitrator is discounted by the presiding arbitrator. The best strategy is to nominate a highly qualified, genuinely neutral arbitrator who is known to understand your legal theory and approach construction and commercial disputes consistently with your case theory.
Can the same arbitrator be nominated in multiple simultaneous proceedings between the same parties?
Generally no — an arbitrator sitting in multiple proceedings between the same parties with overlapping issues creates an unacceptable conflict. Institutional rules and IBA Guidelines require disclosure and often disqualification. Avoid multiple simultaneous nominations of the same individual where there is related dispute involvement.
How important is it that an arbitrator knows UAE law for a UAE-governed contract?
Critical for sole arbitrators; important for presiding arbitrators; less critical for party-nominated co-arbitrators. An arbitrator who does not know UAE law will require extensive expert evidence on UAE law points, increasing costs and delay. For UAE-law-governed disputes, at minimum one tribunal member should have genuine UAE law expertise.
What is the DIAC Court of Arbitration's role in arbitrator appointment?
The DIAC Court of Arbitration (the oversight body of DIAC) confirms all arbitrator nominations and makes institutional appointments where parties fail to nominate. It reviews nominees for conflicts, qualifications, and availability. DIAC may reject party nominees and requires replacements within specified deadlines. The Court's confirmation is required before an arbitrator's appointment is effective.
Related guides
Published 20 May 2026. General information only — not legal advice. Contact us for matter-specific advice.