HKIAC
Hong Kong SAR (28%)
United Kingdom (20%)
Dual nationals (16%)
Australia (7%)
Singapore (5%)
Others (24%)
SIAC
Singapore (32%)
United Kingdom (27%)
Australia (6.5%)
United States (6.3%)
India (5%)
Others (23%)
ICC
United Kingdom (15%)
Switerland (8%)
United States (7.5%)
France (7.5%)
Brazil (7%)
Others (23%)
LCIA
United Kingdom (60%)
United States (6%)
Canada (4%)
Germany (2%)
France (2%)
Others (26%)
ARBITRATOR NATIONALITY
This chart shows the average proportion of arbitrators from each jurisdiction appointed in cases before the relevant institutions as observed over a three-year period from 2021 to 2023.
Parties' choice in arbitrators do not neatly map user-nationalities. As the colour coding shows, English arbitrators continue to dominate all four institutions – particularly in the LCIA and ICC, even if party origins differ: for example, although only 21% of the LCIA's cases in 2023 involved UK parties, more than 80% of its cases used English law, and 60% were heard by English arbitrators.
Similarly, the ICC more often has arbitrators from the UK and Switzerland even though its top users come from the US and Brazil. That suggests that parties many times consider arbitrators from neutral States – particularly in sole arbitrator cases, which make up nearly half of the ICC's case load – or are arbitrating against counterparties from those jurisdictions.