Arb-Med-Arb

Why are we not seeing an uptake in Arb-Med-Arb as an efficient dispute resolution practice in Hong Kong?

The use of Arb-Med-Arb clauses in arbitration institution rules is a growing trend, yet practical implementation in Hong Kong, and beyond, remains scarce. The different institutions each hold different stances as to how much buy-in they give to the process. CIETAC has a long held process of allowing conciliation to be held during the arbitration process (conciliation in China being akin or similar to mediation) and SIAC-SIMC has the SIAC-SIMC AMA Protocol within their rules which enables the parties to opt into the process. Whilst other institutions such as the ICC and HKIAC are softer in their stance and suggest it may be considered as a process. However the key to them all is, party autonomy. So with parties ability to control the process the question is why are they not opting in to it? We’ve been considering the pros and cons to understand why this might be, how we might address the challenges and to equip ourselves to be able to have conversations with clients about Arb-Med-Arb.