You have 1 free article left this month.
Become a Premium Member to enjoy a wide range of benefits.
You have 1 free article left this month.

Lawyers Weekly - legal news for Australian lawyers

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo
SME Law

In-house dissatisfied with ADR results

As more companies turn to international arbitration, in-house lawyers are beginning to complaint that the process can be just as costly and time-consuming as litigation.

February 04, 2010 By The New Lawyer
expand image

AS more companies turn to international arbitration, in-house lawyers are beginning to complain that the process can be just as costly and time-consuming as litigation. 


At its best, alternative dispute resolution can save the company money and everyone time. But, at its worst, the process can take many, many years, and tie up in-house counsel and expensive external law firms in the process of resolution. 


A new advocacy organisation in the United States is attempting to highlight the problems in what appears to be the preferred dispute resolution process of the future.


Corporate Counsel International Arbitration Group, launched three years ago, is composed of 50 large multinationals, including General Electric Company, Exxon Mobil Corporation and Siemens AG, to name a few. 


As Corporate Counsel reports, the Group is just beginning to make its influence felt, highlighting problems in international arbitration and encouraging reform. 


A member of the Group's steering committee, Ronald Schroeder, said no one he knows who uses arbitration regularly is happy with it. 


Schroeder, who is a senior counsel in General Electric's headquarters, coordinates the company's arbitration policy. He hears the dissatisfaction from other in-house lawyers, which he told Corporate Counsel of well beyond the common complaint that arbitrators resolve disputes by splitting the baby. 


WHile some of the more disappointing results many be victories technically, the financial cost and time cost are too high. An arbitrator will ask: "How can you be unhappy? You won!" To which Schroeder says: "Yeah, but it took six years. And it should have been two. Or six months."


Companies will often be lured to arbitration by an aversion to litigation. Some experts have labelled attitudes towards litigation as bordering on paranoia, seeing it as burdensome and too expensive. 


Tell The New Lawyer what you think about arbitration, litigation, and dispute resolution generally. Where should we be heading and how can in-house counsel properly determine which to use? Send 250 words to the Editor offering your opinion. 


Comments (0)
    Avatar
    Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
    The maximum file size for uploads is MB. Only files are allowed.
     
    The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
    The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
    Posting as
    You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member today
    Got a tip for us?
    If you have any news tips or stories to share, feel free to send them our way.
    Momentum Media Logo
    Most Innovative Company