Mr. McArthur founded his current office in large part in order to devote more of his time to serving as an arbitrator. His interest in arbitration is based upon three guiding beliefs:
- First, the growth in population and economic activity in the United States, set against underfunded state and federal court systems, has made private dispute resolution mechanisms necessary parts of our national judicial system. Most courts have too many cases to handle their dockets expeditiously. The delays inherent in discovery and the duration of appeals are major problems for individuals and businesses. The uncertainty, delay, and cost produced by congestion too often threaten the fair administration of justice. It therefore is vital for lawyers to create an equally fair but more rapid system of alternative dispute resolution. The growing interdependence of U.S. companies on international trade will increase the participation on U.S. companies in international arbitration as well.
- Second, arbitration has a comparative advantage because it can reduce cost and delay. Arbitrators should not have the crowded docket of the average court. It is their responsibility to ensure greater speed by using creative discovery procedures, and they must experiment actively with flexible pretrial and trial procedures.
- Third, it is crucial to arbitration's legitimacy that speed not substitute for justice: arbitrators must deliver independent, objective justice. The deference courts extend to arbitral decisions should not encourage second-class decisionmaking. For arbitration to retain its attractiveness, arbitrators must treat the law as just as binding on them as it is on the courts. They must view the limited appellate review over their decisions as a reason to increase—not decrease—the care with which they decide cases. Even in cases in which he is a party-selected panelist, McArthur prefers the parties to limit ex parte contacts after the first panel meeting and to allow the panelists to decide the case as fully neutral judges.
