Ad hoc arbitration refers to arbitration proceedings that are conducted without the supervision or administration of an established arbitral institution, such as the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) or the American Arbitration Association (AAA). In ad hoc arbitration, the parties themselves manage the arbitration process, including selecting arbitrators, defining procedural rules, and overseeing the logistics of arbitration.
AD Hoc Arbitration
AD Hoc Arbitration
Here are key aspects and considerations related to ad hoc arbitration:
- Arbitrator Selection: In ad hoc arbitration, parties have the flexibility to select arbitrators directly. This allows them to choose individuals with specific expertise or experience relevant to their dispute. The selection process typically involves mutual agreement between the parties on a single arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators.
- Procedural Flexibility: Unlike institutional arbitration, ad hoc arbitration does not follow pre-established procedural rules provided by an arbitral institution. Instead, the parties have the freedom to agree on the arbitration procedure, including rules of evidence, hearing schedules, language of proceedings, and other relevant aspects.
- Cost Considerations: Ad hoc arbitration can potentially be less costly compared to institutional arbitration because parties do not need to pay administrative fees to an arbitral institution. However, the overall costs can vary depending on factors such as arbitrator fees, legal representation, and the complexity of the dispute.
- Management of Proceedings: Since there is no institutional support, the parties are responsible for managing the administrative aspects of the arbitration, such as scheduling hearings, exchanging documents, and complying with procedural timelines. This requires cooperation and communication between the parties and their legal representatives.
- Enforcement of Awards: Ad hoc arbitration awards are generally enforceable under international conventions such as the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. However, enforcement procedures may vary depending on the jurisdiction where enforcement is sought.
- Challenges and Considerations: Ad hoc arbitration requires a higher level of cooperation between the parties compared to institutional arbitration, as they must agree on procedural rules and administrative details from the outset. This can sometimes lead to delays or disputes over procedural matters if the parties do not reach consensus.
- Advantages: The primary advantages of ad hoc arbitration include flexibility in arbitrator selection and procedural rules, potentially lower costs, and tailored procedures that suit the specific needs of the parties and the dispute.
- Disadvantages: On the other hand, ad hoc arbitration lacks the administrative support and procedural framework provided by arbitral institutions, which can lead to uncertainty or inefficiencies if the parties do not effectively manage the arbitration process.
Overall, ad hoc arbitration can be a preferred option for parties seeking greater control over the arbitration process and procedural flexibility. However, careful planning and cooperation between the parties
