The first webinar in the Fundamental Skills in the Counsel Practice of Arbitration Series focused on file and team management in an arbitration case. Moderator Dr. Phillip Landolt FCIArb, Partner of Landolt & Koch, was joined by three speakers sharing their experience on the matter: Ms Natalia Gulyaeva FCIArb, Partner of Hogan Lovells, Ms Gailė Juozapaitytė, Associate Partner of TGS Baltic, and Ms Vassiliki Koumpli FCIArb, Senior Associate of Watson Farley & Williams.

Natalia Gulyaeva presented on file organisation, particularly on maintaining confidentiality and order of the documents. Her first point was that confidentiality shall apply to the arbitration hearing and be on an equal footing with file management. Accessing each piece of electronic or physical documentation shall comply with the non-disclosure rules of a particular jurisdiction. The confidentiality principle prohibits third parties from accessing transcripts of the hearing, written pleadings and submissions, evidence adduced in the arbitration, disclosure materials, and arbitral awards. To ensure confidentiality, it is advisable to establish protocols that cover access restrictions and secure digital storage and to implement permission-based access to the files. Depending on the level of sensitivity, documents may be classified in a system as “highly confidential” or “sensitive”. Other applicable IT tools include narrowing access to records to a particular group of people involved in handling the case, and enabling a notification option when an unauthorised attempt to access a file occurs. Furthermore, the file names in the system may be hidden. 

Turning to the second point, law firms and arbitration institutions have become more inclined to switch to a paperless mode of operation. Electronic filing has a clear advantage with regard to searching among large file amounts. Nonetheless, the arbitral tribunal’s preferences shall be considered since some may require printing out procedural submissions and exhibits. As for electronic filing, it is important to make it searchable and accessible. This might be achieved through creating Optical Character Recognition (OCR) versions of each document, which will help search through entire files for keywords. It is of particular assistance in large arbitrations involving hundreds of documents. Also, documents should be sorted out into sections and categories. For instance, a certain section may contain only documents obtained from the client, including contracts, correspondence, etc. These files should be clearly marked and named in a manner that is understandable to a searcher. On a practical note, searchability is handy when demonstrating files to witnesses or responding to the tribunal’s questions during the oral phase of the arbitration. Correspondence is also subject to being sorted out; hence, the correspondence with a client and with a tribunal should be separated. Names of such files may include the date, arbitration institution title, and the document's subject matter. A distinct file with correspondence will assist in tracing developments in the case and spotting its gaps. Besides, distinct folders should be created for administrative documentation (e.g. contracts with a client, or powers of attorney), procedural submissions from the claimant’s and respondent’s sides, etc. A particular folder should contain procedural orders and schedules - this alleviates the trace of procedural milestones in the case. It is a general practice among counsels to separate and distinguish, by date, drafts of submissions as well. In addition to this, sub-files within categories may be created, which is especially useful for cases with a complex procedural history or extensive correspondence. A clear section for billing also assists in tracking the time and costs of the case. Overall, such a structured, categorised approach is a yardstick of professionalism and a baseline for any arbitration case.  

Gailė Juozapaitytė presented on deadline management in arbitration and divided her presentation into two parts: planning the entire schedule of the case and managing the particular filing deadline, adding up practical time-management solutions. Non-compliance with procedural deadlines may result in negative consequences for the party, underlying the cruciality of the topic. A rule of thumb in time management is that any matter may require way more time than allocated initially. Therefore, while planning the entire project, a team may consider increasing time allocation and reserving at least an additional 20% for unexpected circumstances. When planning is started from scratch, the first aspect is the time constraints established by the procedural order. Another core aspect is an assessment of the scope of the case. The need for experts should be factored into planning; expertise conduct will extend the case and require additional timing. Other overlapping projects (e.g. parallel arbitrations) also require consideration while planning the deadlines, to take account of additional steps needed to coordinate projects. On a practical note, hearings in parallel arbitrations may be, for example, scheduled in the same month so the team will remain aware of facts, just updating legal acts for the parallel case. A team may set aside an additional time reserve (e.g. 1-2 weeks) between submission of the last procedural document and the hearing. A sufficient time lag minimises the risk of undesirable postponement of the hearing. Planning a particular filing schedule, e.g. a procedural submission, revolves around three points. First, the draft review by a partner or senior lawyer will require its time slot in the plan. Second, the draft may be dependent on an expert’s findings. Though counsels may proceed with drafting prior expert opinion issued, extra time should be allotted. Third is a witness statement filing, requiring signing and attributing an exhibit number. This stage is very much conditional upon the witness' availability, which should be checked in advance.  

Backward, or reverse, calendars are helpful tools for keeping up with deadlines. Such calendars may include the responsible person for the matter, the action needed, and cut-off dates. Each team member takes a specific role in the project, so deadlines are personalised. Backward calendars may include a time slot reserved for unexpected circumstances. Additionally, a team can establish internal deadlines in the backward calendar (e.g. to finalise the exhibits, prepare their list, insert cross-references and consolidate the documents). Overall, the more extensive scope of a case in terms of submissions, evidence, experts, fact witnesses, and lawyers involved, the more detailed planning will follow. 

The possibility to simultaneously draft and review for several lawyers in the same document is a practical IT solution to save time. Also, it facilitates supervising other team members and keeping up with the work updates, not to mention maintaining the uniform formatting style. Automatisation of the process is important, but counsels should be well aware of the limitations their software has (e.g. certain systems may require a particular naming of files to enable their upload). In addition, lawyers take advantage of artificial intelligence applications in their work; for example, they may double-check formatting inconsistencies with its help (Microsoft Copilot). All in all, the software facilitates time management through the possibility of simultaneous drafting, automatic referencing that updates as soon as a drafter progresses in the file, and the uniform formatting of the template.  

Vassiliki Koumpli concluded with a presentation on team management. Team case handling contributes to cost-efficient and timely dispute resolution. Human resource management revolves around in-house and external project members. Various considerations should be taken into account when composing the team: specific expertise, management skills, applicable law, language knowledge, and technical literacy. While progressing with the team, extraordinary circumstances may occur; for example, the need to replace a team member in case of sickness or need to leave the firm. Furthermore, team members may have other professional engagements running alongside the project. How many people will be involved in the project is also contingent on the time frame within which the arbitration will last. In terms of budget, the number of project members and their seniority depends on the cost amount a client is ready to allot for the case. Overall, the above-mentioned aspects are interrelated when deciding on how many specialists the project will encompass and with what expertise and workload.  

The core aspect of team management is proper planning and coordination of team members. It concerns the allocation of working tasks among the group, such as client reporting, communication with the arbitral institution, conduct of legal research, drafting of the submissions, compiling of witness statements, search for experts and, as a final stage, oral presentation. Seniority, experience, and particular expertise are to be considered when allocating tasks. Flexibility is a soft skill a team member should possess, meaning adaptation to the flow of the process. It is also possible that a role attributed to a team member initially might be changed within the course of the hearing. Eventually, the client may request a cut of the budget, so certain members are dismissed from the team if their participation appears unnecessary. In contrast, the team might be expanded if the case requires it and the client concedes to the budget increase. 

As for external assistants, a counsel may use the help of third parties: co-counsels, experts, private investigators, interpreters, etc. However, this depends on the case itself and available financial resources. A counsel should maintain a regular line of communication with those involved in the project so no one is left out of the “boat”, and each person is updated on the development of the case. Lastly, clear invoicing and billing statements should be maintained to avoid confusion. Counsels should provide descriptions of how the time billed was used. Each billing should be clearly justified - vague statements are unhelpful in this regard. Apart from the external members, certain companies require their in-house lawyers to be included as representatives. Companies view this from the perspective of time efficiency and cost saving. As confirmed by the ICC studies, legal representation often covers the vast amount of costs involved in arbitration, so it is critical for the firm to be in control of the case process. An in-house lawyer plays an important role during various steps of the arbitration: drafting the arbitration clause, determining the issues of the dispute, producing evidence, and obtaining the final receipt of the award for the company. The efficient work between internal and external counsels depends on the ease of access to information for both sides. In fact, an internal counsel manages an external counsel, so communication between these two teams should remain dynamic and straightforward. It may involve regular meetings or mutual reporting to help keep updated on the specific submission.  

From a cultural point of view, the diversity among counsels and tribunal members has become more discussed in recent years. In fact, diversity facilitates the quality of advocacy and contributes to open-mindedness and looking at the problem from a different perspective, so it often may impress the tribunal. Nonetheless, cultural diversity may sometimes be a source of social tensions and misunderstandings. Consciously or unconsciously, cultural biases are present, impacting the tribunal's perception of a counsel as credible. In turn, the cultural proximity of counsels and decision-makers may help to avoid unnecessary social tensions as well as tribunal dismissals and foster better access to justice for a client. As such, this point should also be factored in when compiling the team.