LITIGATION TRENDS 2025 | 71 T O C E M P E S G A N T I I P C A P R O W C S P O R T C O N T A C T I N T A P P P A T C C L S E C traditional neutrality and the increasing politicization of international disputes. Sanctions can further affect proceedings by limiting: ■ the selection and participation of certain parties, arbitrators, and legal representatives; ■ the choice of arbitral seat and governing law; and/or ■ the payment and enforcement of arbitral awards. Conclusion The interplay between sanctions and arbitration requires careful navigation, and is likely to become ever more complex given the increasingly febrile and fractured international legal framework. Businesses, financial institutions and legal practitioners must be proactive in assessing the potential impact of sanctions on their contractual relationships and dispute resolution mechanisms. Going forward, parties should consider: ■ drafting arbitration clauses with safeguards against sanctions-related enforceability risks; ■ seeking early legal advice on the applicability of sanctions to ongoing arbitration proceedings; and ■ engaging with enforcement risk assessments before commencing arbitration, particularly in politically sensitive disputes. Sanctions illustrate the growing tension between arbitration’s traditional neutrality and the increasing politicization of international disputes. Key Insights into Successful Challenges to Arbitrator Appointments Parties’ ability to select an arbitrator is often seen as one of the key benefits of arbitration as a method of dispute resolution. However, just as this choice can be viewed as a positive, in many cases, a party may be dissatisfied with the choice of a certain arbitrator made by the opposing side, and may seek to challenge their appointment. Such challenges may be made out of genuine concerns over impartiality or, sometimes, as a tactical maneuver. As a general matter, as the sophistication of arbitral institutions and their rules has grown in recent decades, so too has the range of possibilities open to a party who wishes to challenge an arbitrator’s appointment. Data released in December 2024 by the London Court of International Arbitration provides an overview of the types of objections raised and their respective outcomes. Potential Grounds for Challenging the Appointment of Arbitrators Most institutional arbitration rules, including those of the LCIA, provide specific grounds for challenging arbitrator appointments. These grounds typically include justifiable doubts about an arbitrator’s impartiality or independence, failure to act fairly, or lack of reasonable efficiency in conducting the arbitration. These principles are broadly consistent across institutional rules and are reflected in the national laws of many jurisdictions. In the event of a challenge being made to the appointment of an arbitrator, the challenge is usually decided upon not by the arbitral tribunal itself, but by the arbitral institution. Recent LCIA Publication The LCIA’s latest publication includes 24 anonymised decisions made by the LCIA Court on arbitrator challenges from July 22, 2017 to December 31, 2022. Only two of these challenges were successful, as described below. I I International Arbitration 70 | Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTI5NDgyMg==