
SCC: ๐๐ฟ๐ฏ๐ถ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ฐ๐ต๐ฎ๐น๐น๐ฒ๐ป๐ด๐ฒ๐ ๐ถ๐ป ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฎ๐ด๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ผ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฎ๐น ๐บ๐ฒ๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฎ: ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐ฑ๐ผ๐ฒ๐ "๐ฝ๐ผ๐น๐ถ๐๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐น ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ถ๐ป๐ถ๐ผ๐ป" ๐บ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ป ๐ณ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ถ๐บ๐ฝ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐๐ถ๐ฎ๐น๐ถ๐๐? ย As geopolitical tensions...
Published on August 11, 2026
๐๐ฟ๐ฏ๐ถ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ฐ๐ต๐ฎ๐น๐น๐ฒ๐ป๐ด๐ฒ๐ ๐ถ๐ป ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฎ๐ด๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ผ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฎ๐น ๐บ๐ฒ๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฎ: ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐ฑ๐ผ๐ฒ๐ "๐ฝ๐ผ๐น๐ถ๐๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐น ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ถ๐ป๐ถ๐ผ๐ป" ๐บ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ป ๐ณ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ถ๐บ๐ฝ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐๐ถ๐ฎ๐น๐ถ๐๐?
As geopolitical tensions reshape the international arbitration landscape, parties are scrutinising arbitrators' backgrounds more closely than ever, and social media has become a primary hunting ground.
In a new article for Kluwer Arbitration Blog, our Legal Counsel Emma Garrett and Yi Ting Sam, together with former SCC Visiting Professional Lexie Gao (้ซๅฉ), build on our November 2025 Practice Note on arbitrator challenge decisions (2020โ2024) by adding four previously unpublished cases from January 2025 to June 2026. Together, the eight decisions examined offer a consolidated view of how the SCC Board approaches challenges grounded in political opinion.
Three factors consistently shape the Board's analysis:
๐น ๐๐๐๐ฟ๐ถ๐ฏ๐๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป โ a law firm's or chambers' political stance is not automatically attributed to an individual arbitrator; to date, no challenge based on firm-level conductโฆ
