Arbitrator Approach
Having served as counsel and as arbitrator, and having designed dispute resolution systems for arbitral institutions, an international organisation and corporate clients, I bring a proceduralist's rigour and a willingness to innovate rather than default to standard templates or rigid procedural formulae. I believe an arbitrator earns authority by mastering the case. I am acutely conscious of the time and cost that parties invest in arbitration, and I consider it the tribunal's responsibility to keep proceedings focused on the issues that genuinely require determination.
I have appeared before tribunals that were passive — that had not done the work to study the record or crystallise the real issues — and I do not sit that way. My practice is to review all submissions as they are filed, to avoid scheduling major engagements—at a minimum—the week before a hearing, and to take several days after a hearing — whether I am presiding or sitting as a co-arbitrator — to crystallise my thoughts and prepare my deliberation notes. This allows me to come prepared, engage actively, and take a firm hand in moving the parties toward the questions that decide the case, while never treating party autonomy as a licence for drift. I value clarity, preparation and open communication throughout the process, and I believe procedural decisions should be reasoned, proportionate and predictable, so that the parties understand what is expected of them and of the tribunal. I will not trade due process for speed; but I commit absolutely to deciding promptly — issuing awards as soon as possible after final briefing, and keeping the parties apprised of the tribunal's progress throughout.
Having spent my life living and working across the world, I regard cultural insight as central to an arbitrator's task. I have handled matters that are commercially intricate and geopolitically sensitive, and I am vigilant that no party is prejudiced — that its legal tradition, language, or way of arguing its case never becomes a disadvantage. That vigilance is matched by a real openness to, and training in, the common law, civil law and Sharīʿa commercial law, and by a strong commercial sensibility — an instinct for what actually drives a transaction and the dispute it produces — that lets me meet each case on its own terms.