Arbitration Management Services

SETTLEMENT OR LITIGATION?

When modern enterprises become involved in complex disputes, it puts a strain on all stakeholders involved if the process is to ultimately add value to the enterprise.
When a large and very complex dispute looms on the horizon, the following scenarios may occur:

• No one in the enterprise takes real ownership of the process;
• the external attorneys are vague as to the risk, time and finances involved;
• it is difficult to establish a direct link (even if it exists) between the overall strategy of the enterprise and the litigation;
• the in-house lawyers have no litigation expertise and would add more value concentrating on other work as there is a risk that they will become a bottleneck to the process;
• the process is not understood, and the prospect of a dispute is demotivating;
• the management fears the uncertainty of the outcome of the dispute, press coverage, future relations in the market, demotivated employees, and provisions in the accounts;
• everyone would rather “look ahead”.

For this reason, many enterprises prefer to avoid disputes, and almost at any cost.

In our opinion, such “settlement at any cost” approach to disputes is too simplistic in the world of today where not all disputes can or should be avoided.

Failure to provide sufficient nuance to the approach and to base it on considered analyses may lead to unfortunate business decisions and settlements based on the wrong grounds.

Over time, this may result in the loss of substantial amounts that could have been spent on growth.

WHAT IS ARBITRATION MANAGEMENT SERVICES?

”Arbitration Management Services” is the work involved in early planning and a conscious approach to the work involved in project management of large and complex disputes.

The largest expenses involved in a dispute by far are those connected to the time spent within the organisation that could have been spent on future work rather than unstructured reporting processes and continuous servicing of external advisors, often at short notice, with input to the dispute.

In large disputes, this work may tie up multiple full-time resources that spend enormous amounts of time on establishing facts by retrieving correspondence, minutes of meetings, etc., holding meetings with witnesses, coordinating and collaborating with expert witnesses, and examining pleadings and documents.

We know from experience that efficient project management of a large dispute is an independent discipline requiring special expertise that is often different from the specialist skills that are brought in from external counsel in connection with the preparation of the specific legal arguments of the case and the litigation in court.

THE PROCESS

Our approach is based on tested practice and on having managed some of the largest and most complex infrastructure disputes in Denmark, both as in-house counsel and external counsel.

Our approach is normally divided into the following four stages:

We always begin with a stepwise introduction where two or three introductory meetings will lead to an overall strategic workshop with the participation of all in-house and external stakeholders. At the workshop, the overall framework for the dispute will be determined for its entire duration in a format that is workable and understandable to everyone involved.

Then, before the litigation work is initiated (stage 2), Poul Schmith’s total package of existing and tested online tools, templates and processes will be customised to ensure the efficient handling of the dispute. In this process, the project’s toolbox will be customised to the individual project using, where expedient, the systems and reporting formats that are already familiar to our clients.

Our existing processes and templates include methods for all essential steps in the preparatory stage of the dispute, including for example:

• Format and concept for initial strategic workshops and stakeholder alignment;
• the playbook of the dispute as well as all project management documents (project description, budgets, strategy plan, communication plan, timelines and work

WHICH DISPUTES SHOULD BE PROJECT MANAGED?

Not all disputes are of a size that is suitable for full implementation of our existing project management tools.
Although all disputes will be suitable for increased focus on the project management part, it is usually the disputes that are very extensive in terms of evidence, that involve several jurisdictions, or consist of several independent disputes that are best suited for an independent focus on the project management aspects.

We always ensure individual customisation of the tools applied to a dispute in order to ensure the best possible creation of value for each individual dispute.

If you are in doubt as to whether your dispute is suitable, please contact us for a non-binding meeting to assess the suitability of the dispute.

We also assist with disputes where we are not the litigating counsel in the dispute. In such cases, we are the project manager or assist the client’s in-house lawyer who is the project manager.