SCC Spotlight Talk: Faris Nasrallah

International arbitration stands at the intersection of theory and practice, shaped by evolving legal systems, diverse stakeholders, and global narratives. How do we ensure arbitration remains fit and relevant into the future?

In this SCC Spotlight Talk, Dr Faris Nasrallah discusses his doctoral research, which explores the relationship between the theory and practice of international arbitration. Importantly, he considers how arbitration functions, adapts, and can be futureproofed. 

How does arbitration work, and who are the key stakeholders? 

International arbitration is not just a legal process but a transnational mechanism, influenced by a plurality of laws, rules, and norms. Its operation depends on the interplay between parties, counsel, arbitrators, and institutions – acting as ‘arbitral agents’, often in multiple roles and simultaneously, and each with different spheres of agency and normative power. 

What makes arbitration effective in daily practice? 

The effectiveness of arbitration is rooted in the daily normative practices of individuals and institutions. Practitioners of various stripes navigate complex legal relations, manage hybrid interactions, and apply both hard and soft laws to resolve disputes and allocate costs.  

What forces are shaping international arbitration today? 

The meaning of international arbitration and how it travels, particularly between Global North and Global South, remains relatively unstudied, at least in the English language. I argue that the field is better understood by interdisciplinary research and methods, drawing on law, anthropology, and sociology. Such approaches broaden our understanding of arbitration’s place within and between legal systems, and highlights the importance of conceptual thinking alongside professional practice. 

How do these influences manifest in practice? 

Take for example the growth and transformation of arbitration in Dubai which illustrates the dynamic relationship between local legal realities and global aspirations, from stringent controls and protectionism to outward facing international institutions vying for global arbitration business, which together offer insights into how city-states and federal systems interact with the international arbitration community. Recalling here the importance of narrative and normative positionality, the Cold War provided an opportunity for Stockholm to act as a neutral bridge between East and West. 

Another example is the costs economy – the management of costs in arbitration is a technical yet critical area, with multiple agents constructing and applying norms to ensure fairness and efficiency, often with limited guidance from available hard and soft laws and rules. 

How should international arbitration respond to external criticism? 

Practitioners need to ensure an ongoing dialogue with critics and stakeholders, including activists and policymakers, to ensure that international arbitration remains responsive to external pressures and internal critiques. Interdisciplinary studies also enable the international arbitration community to benefit from the vast ADR literature produced in non-black letter law libraries.  

How can we futureproof international arbitration? 

Counsel and arbitrators should focus on preparing robust costs submissions and rationalising expenses, adopting recommendations that reduce risks and enhance efficiency. The outcomes of my research included specific professional recommendations for counsel and tribunals on understanding costs entitlement, pleading for and apportioning costs.  

What role does interdisciplinary thinking play? 

There are both conceptual and methodological benefits for future interdisciplinary research on international arbitration. That work requires openness to interdisciplinary insights and literature, often found outside traditional legal sources. This, in my view, enriches conceptual frameworks and practical approaches. 

What responsibility do practitioners have in shaping the future? 

Practitioners must reflect on their multiple and often simultaneous roles in reproducing or innovating norms and practices, actively shaping the future of arbitration through conscious engagement and adaptation. 

What role does community dialogue play? 

Sustained dialogue within the arbitration community – across conferences, institutions, and policy forums – will drive collective conceptual work and ensure the field remains relevant and resilient. The SCC’s continued and diverse engagements with the community and its stakeholders is a good example of this. 

Based on your research and experience, what is your final message for practitioners and stakeholders? 

To understand, shape, and futureproof international arbitration, practitioners and stakeholders must engage with its mechanisms, embrace interdisciplinary perspectives, and commit to ongoing learning and innovation. My research provides a roadmap for navigating certain challenges and opportunities, to ensure that international arbitration remains attractive, effective and adaptable in a changing world.