Jean Kalicki

Two well-known international arbitrators in New York, Jean Kalicki and Lucy Reed, have just helped launch the New York office of a global arbitrator network called Arbitration Chambers.

Arbitration Chambers has an uncommon approach, as it operates as a network for independent arbitrators to share administrative and office expenses, Kalicki said in an interview. The network provides administrative support by supplying office equipment, office space and by hiring assistants for the arbitrators who could serve as a type of law clerk. In return, arbitrators provide a percentage of their case revenue to the network.

The chamber's members remain independent and do not share information about matters before them. Kalicki said she's not aware of an international arbitrator network in New York with the same approach. "I think this is the first international arbitrator's network in the U.S. period," she said.

This approach may become more popular as more lawyers leave big firms earlier in their careers to focus solely on international arbitration, she said. Such lawyers frequently "work from their living rooms" or are forced to rent an expensive office that they may only use once a week, she said.

Both Kalicki and Reed are investor-state and commercial arbitrators who frequently sit on panels of prominent international arbitration institutions. Kalicki was formerly a partner at Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer and has been an independent international arbitrator since 2016. Reed is the former head of the Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer's global international arbitration group and president-elect of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration, an NGO group promoting arbitration.

Arbitration Chambers was established in Hong Kong in 2012 and expanded to London in 2017.

Kalicki spoke with the New York Law Journal about the increasing demand for international arbitrators independent of firms and other career trends in the profession. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Q: How do you continue to remain independent even when joining an organization of other arbitrators?

A: Members of Arbitration Chambers are all independent professionals, as I am currently. That will not change. It's not a corporation. We're not co-owners as we would be in a law firm, we're loosely affiliated through chambers.

Q: What's holding the arbitrators together? And what's the benefit to belonging in it?

A: This was a chance to continue my work as an independent arbitrator but obtain administrative support. Most independent arbitrators tend to work out of their living rooms or homes.

For both Lucy and me, the decision to use the chambers model is a recognition that there are some hurdles of working completely solo. There's the administrative hurdle, there's the isolation factor. This allows people the collegiality and administrative benefits of working together. It's a co-working environment under a common brand that emphasizes the premier nature of the specialty. The people at Arbitration Chambers are really leaders of the community.

Q: Why do you believe that international arbitrators outside law firms are more in demand?

A: There's a conflict, especially when you are dealing with treaty disputes. How can you credibly be speaking in your own name as an independent arbitrator on a legal standard and the following week, making a credible argument for a client (that runs counter to it)? Also, how can an arbitrator be arguing that the standard meets X, when your partner down the hall is arguing the standard meets Y?

This has been one of the factors that have spurred the departure of prominent arbitrators from law firms to set up independent practices. That's the background of why I left my firm four years ago and why many arbitrators who are prominent have been leaving law firms.

Until fairly recently in the arbitration market, lawyers became arbitrators when they retired from law firms. What you've had in the last 10 years are people who leave law firm practices at an earlier stage in their law firm career to focus on their work exclusively as an arbitrator. That has been increasing in demand.

There's also been an acceleration of younger partners choosing to make (international arbitration) the exclusive practice of their work and leave behind counsel work. I left my firm (Arnold & Porter) at age 50—15 years before I would have had to retire from a law firm practice. Since then, I've seen quite a number of people do it.

New York is expensive to rent an office space yourself. Given how much we all travel, it certainly doesn't make sense to rent an office one to two days a week.

Q: What are the plans for Arbitration Chambers' New York office?

A: The idea is to keep it small and premier and really just to include full-time arbitrators who are regarded in the market as the top of the profession and who fit the model of collegiality. I can't give you a number, but we're talking about a handful (of arbitrators in each office).

Q: Do you think Arbitration Chambers' approach will catch on?

A: Yes, I imagine some of the leading sets in London will be looking at this move by Arbitration Chambers and will be wondering "should we consider this?"

Parties don't need an arbitrator at our billing rates to be site checking our own work. This allows the senior people to work efficiently and productively to do the work that the parties are appointing us to do.