Pham Duy Nghia graduated at Leipzig University in Germany (LLB 1988, PhD 1991). He was a Fulbright visiting scholar at Harvard Law School (2001-2002). At Fulbright University Vietnam he teaches Law and Public Policy, Public Governance, Research Methods of Public Policy. As arbitrator Prof Pham Duy Nghia has served in more than 100 cases hearing transnational business disputes, including commercial, investment, construction, insurance, corporate disputes, M & A and intellectual property disputes. Besides teaching, research, and practicing law, Pham Duy Nghia is a frequent commentator in leading newspapers and media in Vietnam. The areas concerned include protection of basic citizen’s right, voice and accountability in public governance, regulatory quality, rule of law and access to justice.
Arbitration can be very simple, but it can also be a voyage to nowhere in the middle of the sea. From the departure to destination, the Tribunal as collective is expected to steer the board. It shall make decisions, either procedural or on merits, by deliberation. But how tribunal deliberations work, particularly in cross-cultural arbitration? That is certainly a mysterious black-box, because tribunal deliberations are case specific (it depends on the nature of the disputes), tribunal specific (it depends on the composition of the tribunal, the background and profile, and mentality of the presiding arbitrator and its fellows), and the like. But there are some best practice for efficient deliberations: Not consensus, but collegiality is important: each arbitrator shall actively be involved. Not focusing on the destination, enjoying the voyage: the facts, the issues, the rational behind the disputes are important. Not merely the award, an efficient case management, fairness and due