During a recent Practising Law Institute panel discussion, I gathered corporate lawyers, litigators and arbitrators to discuss certain trends in arbitration agreements and arbitration more generally.  It was a unique opportunity to encourage a dialogue among the various constituents, and led to some fascinating exchanges on the arbitration ecosystem's desire and ability to adapt to the needs of certain industries.

Two sectors come to mind ¾ namely financial institutions and technology ¾ as ripe to use arbitration but often still reluctant to do so.  In this article, I discuss developments in arbitration procedural rules as they relate to four issues that seem to be the key bases of such reluctance: the "optionality" of confidentiality, speed and expedited procedures, early dismissal opportunities and appealability of an arbitral award.

Confidentiality 'Optionality'

Arbitration is a private process but not necessarily a confidential one.  While arbitrators must treat arbitration matters as confidential, the parties are not always required to do so.  The scope of party confidentiality obligations depends on the rules of the arbitration administering institution, the parties' arbitration agreement itself, and any other agreement the parties may elect to enter into once a dispute arises.  It will also be subject to applicable law, which will vary based on the seat of the arbitration and the law governing the arbitration.