header-logo header-logo

International arbitration: a hybrid future?

18 June 2020 / Anthony Connerty
Issue: 7891 / Categories: Features , ADR , Covid-19
printer mail-detail
Anthony Connerty assesses the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on international arbitration
  • COVID-19 and its current influence on international arbitration.
  • COVID-19 and the future of international arbitration: the hybrid hearing?

The impact of the pandemic on litigation in the civil and criminal courts in England and Wales has been considerable: those courts are geared for face-to-face hearings. That is especially so in the case of criminal trials before a jury. The need for those courts to switch to remote hearings represents a major change. The effect of coronavirus on international arbitration is likely to have less impact: international arbitration is already familiar with remote hearings in one form or another.

The author’s experience as counsel and arbitrator in the conduct of an international arbitration—whether institutional or ad hoc—is that various procedures are already used which may be labelled ‘remote’.

With parties in different countries and in different time zones the procedure at an arbitration is likely to involve matters such as:

  • the use of telephone conferences: for
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll