International Commercial Dispute Resolution: The Challenge of the Twenty-first Century

Abstract

WHEN I reveal the theme for this lecture you may well think that I am a bit like the proverbial turkey extolling the virtues of Christmas. Looking into my crystal ball, I predict mat over the next few years we shall experience a proportionate decline in the engagement of third parties for assistance in resolving mature international trade disputes. If I am right about this the current level of expansion of work for arbitrators and mediators will decline, and there will be an increasing demand for dispute management specialists rather than dispute resolution experts. I propose to try to explain my views as to how the dispute resolution community might react to this challenge. From my perspective, as the twenty-first century gets under way, we are already seeing a movement away from the three classical forms of third party intervention in dispute resolution – the judge in his court; the arbitrator in his hotel conference room; and the mediator shuttling between the parties, trying to get the parties to reach some form of acceptable compromise settlement. In Europe and the USA we now hear the phrase ‘dispute management’ used almost as often as the traditional term ‘dispute resolution’. ‘Dispute management’ is a relatively new term and I am not sure that we could all agree on what it means. For me it means two things. First, and most important, it means dispute avoidance ; secondly, it means that where the parties cannot avoid falling into dispute, they enter into a structured direct negotiation process designed to limit the occasions on which they will need to involve a third party to the barest possible minimum. My main purpose today, after explaining why I think this is going to happen, is to take a look at the likely consequences for all of …