ASIA ADR WEEK 2023: Day 1 - Session 4

Session 4: Rapid Fire Debate

Debate 1: The Role of Expert Witnesses in Arbitration: Independent Advisors or Sources of Conflict?

Debate 2: Emergency Arbitration: Swift Relief or Questionable Effectiveness?

Moderator: Mr. Belden Premaraj (Belden Advocates & Solicitors)
House A: Mr. Chang Wei Mun (Independent Arbitrator)
House A: Mr. Ish Jain (Arbitrator)
House B: Mr. Glenn George Cheng (GGCLaw)
House B: Mr. GK Ganesan (GK Ganesan)

We first heard from Mr. Chang Wei Mun, who started the first motion for expert witnesses in arbitration, where he stated that it is necessary for disputing parties and the arbitral tribunal to reach an informed decision, premised on the advice of independent parties, i.e., the expert witnesses.

Subsequently, we heard from Mr. Glenn George Cheng who argued the first motion against expert witnesses in arbitration. Mr. Cheng argued that expert witnesses are susceptible to providing conflicting opinions when summoned due to various factors, e.g. when there are multiple experts with differing opinions involved in the same arbitration.

The debate advanced to the second motion with Mr. Ish Jain arguing the case for emergency arbitrations. Mr. Jain argued that the effectiveness of emergency arbitration can be determined by whether the purpose for which the mechanism requested is met at the end of the proceeding.

Mr. GK Ganesan took to the floor to contend the case against emergency arbitration, emphasising that emergency arbitration should not be treated as a one-size-fits-all solution that can be applied in all instances.