Silent clause

If, as is usual, you choose (i), the procedure to be followed in the arbitration will be dictated by (in order of precedence):

• any mandatory procedural rules of the law of the seat,
• the agreement of the parties once the dispute has arisen,
• the procedure in any institutional rules to which the arbitration is subject, and
• the decision of the arbitrators.

In practice, neither institutional rules nor arbitration laws provide much of a timetable, and they leave the arbitrators a lot of discretion to fix the procedure. The arbitrators’ attitude will be conditioned by their background (see the sections on individual countries under seat) and the parties’ submissions as applied to the dispute with which they have to deal.

In purely domestic arbitrations, arbitrators are understandably much influenced by local court procedure. In international arbitrations, some degree of consensus has emerged, with a compromise between common law and civil law systems (though definitely slanted towards the common law): arbitrators take a fairly passive, rather than inquisitorial, role; there is no general discovery of documents, but either party may call for specific documents or categories of documents; cross-examination of witnesses is allowed, and is done by the opposing party more than by the tribunal; and expert witnesses are appointed by the parties more than by the tribunal.

But as for the timetable and scale of the arbitration, you will be almost wholly in the hands of the tribunal.