arbitration

Naturally, when contemplating arbitration, each party will want to nominate as many arbitrators to the panel as possible to increase their chances of obtaining a favorable outcome.  If one side gets to pick all of the arbitrators to a dispute, it is more likely that the dispute will be resolved in their favor.  However, arbitration agreements that grant too much power to only one party are invalid and therefore, clauses granting one party unilateral power to appoint arbitrators is invalid under Japanese law.

Arbitrations are designed to be a fair and unbiased method to settle disputes without resulting to the judicial system.  However, for some parties, the location of the arbitration still presents a potential for bias.  In cases where the parties wish to ensure that the arbitration is as fair as possible, holding the arbitration in a neutral 3rd country may help ease the worry that the arbitrator might be biased.

As alternatives to litigation, mediation and arbitration both share some similarities, but it is important to know the differences between the two before choosing which method is right for your situation.  In general, mediation can only end with an agreement between the parties, while arbitration can end with a decision by an arbitrator.

If a party to the arbitration does not appear then the arbitrators will need to make their decision based upon the evidence available to them.  One party failing to appear will not ordinarily suspend or cancel an arbitration.  Therefore, it is important for both parties to make an appearance so the arbitrators can make a fully informed decision.