Originally from The Dark Side of Arbitration, Second Edition

Preview

I.    Administered Arbitration versus Ad Hoc Arbitration
The importance of arbitral institutions in administering arbitrations, though varying from one institution to another, cannot be overstressed.  Despite these differences, our personal experience is that these institutions generally fulfill their role well. Yet, there is room for improvement, as discussed below, and indeed some lights and shadows in the way the arbitral institutions perform their role.
Administered arbitration has many advantages over ad hoc arbitration. These advantages become very clear if one has been involved in ad hoc arbitrations, in which the much-vaunted benefits, such as greater flexibility, lower costs, or greater confidentiality, often do not materialize. In fact, these benefits are offset by the fact that there is no disciplined framework or predictability on important aspects like arbitrators’ fees, the control over the arbitrators’ independence and impartiality, and the duration of the proceedings. The parties to ad hoc arbitrations also do not receive any assistance, for example, for the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. Absent an appointing authority, the respondent can stall the proceedings by simply refusing or delaying the appointment of its arbitrator.