ACR-GNY - Time and Cost

Log in

Time and Cost

Thursday, January 22, 2026 6:06 PM | Anonymous

EFFECTIVE COST CUTTING Time Equals ...

Why do some arbitrations take longer—and cost more—than expected? How can the process become more efficient and cost effective?

What are your thoughts?

Add comment

Comments

Friday, January 23, 2026 1:27 PM | Janice Sperow

Two biggest reasons I see are counsel who insist upon importing full litigation discovery into the arbitration, including by putting discovery clauses into their arbitration agreements, and unprofessional/acrimonious counsel who fight about everything, including minor deadlines and skirmishes.

Link • Reply
Friday, January 23, 2026 1:46 PM | Thomas Hanrahan

Schedules for counsel can be a factor in setting the initial schedule, but lack of appreciation of the flexibility in arbitration and opportunity to obtain needed information informally is a major contributor. A Prelim Hearing that discusses these issues can go a long way to mitigating lawyers' sense of how long things should take.

Link • Reply

Author

* Comment
Friday, January 23, 2026 1:53 PM | Aarta Alkarimi

So much time and effort goes into drafting institutional rules to serve the interests of all stakeholders. When those rules are properly understood, rigorously followed, applied, and supported by an arbitrator who has the necessary availability, the system works.

Link • Reply
Friday, January 23, 2026 1:55 PM | Jack Levin

In most matters, counsel freely extend time to provide discovery. Active management can control this to some extent, but the reality is that counsel often dictate the pace.

Link • Reply
Friday, January 23, 2026 2:02 PM | Leslie W. Langbein

I spend more time on a case when counsel for the parties have not done their job, such as: 1) clearly setting forth a chronology of events, 2) sticking to the issues we identified at the pre-hearing conference, 3) fully briefing legal issues and the types of relief to which they are entitled, 4) complying with deadlines and 5) providing relevant discovery. That is why the vast majority of arbitrations take longer and cost more: because one or both sides put forth less effort than they should have to provide the arbitrator with what was necessary to make a decision.

Link • Reply
- Friday, January 23, 2026 2:40 PM | Raoul Drapeau
  
  I find that the best cases are when both the parties and their counsel are prepared with their documentary evidence and witnesses. The worst is the opposite of that and when counsel decides to be unnecessarily aggressive and uncooperative. Fortunately, in the Preliminary hearing, some of these unwelcome characteristics may become apparent, so you can be prepared to deal with them in the Evidentiary hearing.
  
  Link • Reply
Friday, January 23, 2026 3:03 PM | Karen Fitzgerald

Frankly, I think sometimes the arbitrators contribute to the cost of the process. A lot of arbitrators require the parties to prepare things that would not be necessary in litigation and that adds to the cost for the parties. For example, why do arbitrators need post-hearing briefing in all cases? Why do we make each side give us a proposed draft of findings of fact and conclusions of law in cases where that will be required? Judges decide bench trials often without post hearing briefing or requiring each party to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Juries decide cases based solely on the evidence heard. Why do we as arbitrators always need more than that? I know this might be a controversial opinion, but I think we should all look at what we are asking the parties to do and see if we are contributing to the cost of arbitration through our own processes.

Link • Reply
- Friday, January 23, 2026 7:39 PM | Jack Levin
  
  This is a worthwhile discussion. Some arbitrators have “their way” of doing things. That can be a problem. Are there any arbitrators who still require paper instead of electronic documents? There’s a place for some paper, but, for example, requiring big binders of exhibits might be a thing of the past. I agree that what needs briefing should be a discussion with counsel.
  
  Link • Reply
Friday, January 23, 2026 5:16 PM | Anonymous

the lack of efficiency in the arbitral process is influenced by several factors. Some of them include the panel not being directive or strong enough to help direct efficiency and expediency; lawyers who cannot cooperate (especially in discovery); fishing expeditions for the sake of annoying others; counsel’s belief their ineffective
conduct is what clients expect; failure to plan and prepare throughout the experience, especially with regard to planning today / anticipating what tomorrow will be/need. Helping counsel script/design not just the discovery but also the hearing phases is critical.

Link • Reply
Monday, January 26, 2026 1:03 PM | Geoffrey BH

i) Because lawyers insist on pretending they are in Court - and earning fees; and ii) arbitrator should be proactive an inquire into the respective cases of the parties - no law forbids this.

Link • Reply