AIJA International Arbitration
Newsletter No.45, October 2016

10 Shots

A new window to learn more about international arbitration and arbitrators

Antonios Tsavaridis is a very active and well-known Greek practitioner in the arbitration field. He has a longstanding experience in disputes involving arbitration before the leading arbitration centres around the world and under the most widely used arbitration rules.

Sole Arbitrator or a Panel?
In small claims, always a sole arbitrator, otherwise the arbitration would cost more than the actual dispute; in high value and complicated claims, always a Panel, as the combined wisdom of (usually) three arbitrators avoids -in principle- the arbitrariness of one man (or woman).

Ad Hoc or Administered Arbitration?
Made (or half-made…) to measure or ready to wear? It depends on the clients and their needs.

Fast Track or more time to assess?
Fast track is best suited for disputes that arise in the course of performance of an agreement (esp. in construction and shipbuilding) and usually between parties having a continuous trading relationship. Other than that, time pressure is not always conducive to a fair and balanced award.

Expensive or affordable arbitration?
This is a false dilemma. We all know that the main reason for an arbitration to become an expensive exercise is the hourly fee rate of the counsel retained and the high value of the amount in dispute. More reasonable counsel fee rates do not necessarily mean less efficient representation. A high value dispute does not in its own right make a case more complicated or difficult compared to a “cheaper” dispute, yet in the former case the higher cost is “absorbed” more easily.

Favorite venue?
As counsel for claimants, I would prefer Geneva or Paris. As counsel for respondents, I’d travel to more exotic destinations.

Waiver of responsibility for an arbitrator, yes or no?
I would opt for a balanced waiver, which is more or less the current state of affairs in most jurisdictions; you dispense with frivolous claims and yet you cater for intolerable behaviours.

Partial award, favorable or not?
Definitely favourable – it clears the landscape and saves costs.

What do you remember of your first experience as arbitrator?
received my very first appointment as a co-arbitrator in a reinsurance case. The chairman, a distinguished former CEO in a number of insurance companies and a top (and rare) expert in reinsurance business, was the epitome of “commercial man”. In the first procedural meeting with the parties, he felt the need to explain in an open way what he thought of the claim. The claimant dropped the case before the end of the meeting and so my first experience as arbitrator became also my shortest.

A funny anecdote
A long time ago a renowned (and late) professor of commercial law in a civil law country was appointed as co-arbitrator in an arbitration administered by a well-known organisation (that much I can reveal…) and in turn agreed for the appointment of another professor as chairman on the basis of the latter’s previously published opinion (and, rumour has it, a promise that he wouldn’t turn) on a matter that was relevant to the case (or this was what he thought…). Unfortunately, it turned out that the chairman changed his mind and opinion. Angry (and betrayed?), the late professor sought to challenge the award by filing (himself) a motion to set it aside. Fortunately enough for the arbitration law of that country, the court dismissed the motion. 

One thing you would change in the arbitral practice.
I do believe deliberation in person between the members of a tripartite arbitral tribunal before rendering the award is indispensable. It is a pity that sometimes, mostly because the chairman is overloaded, it is skipped and replaced by conference.

A special thanks goes to Antonios Tsavaridis, who accepted to delight in our 10 Shots.