The bigger picture of arbitration
Tom Scott
3 Mar 2026
A conversation with Marc Krestin, Partner at Fieldfisher
The bigger picture of arbitration
A conversation with Marc Krestin, Partner at Fieldfisher
Marc Krestin is a dispute resolution lawyer at Fieldfisher with over 18 years of experience in international litigation and arbitration. Having worked in the Netherlands and France, his career path has focused on complex cross-border disputes, with a particular emphasis on arbitration.
With an international upbringing spanning Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands and France, Marc views arbitration as a natural extension of his background. “It is global by nature,” he explains, “and requires cultural awareness, as well as an understanding of international law, economics and geopolitics.”
From your perspective, what role does arbitration play today in supporting trust and continuity in international business?
Arbitration supports trust and continuity. And therefore it converts some of the uncertainty that businesses may encounter across their lifecycle into enforceable decisions. Arbitration gives companies security and finality about disputes, enabling them to move on with their core business.
In cross-border commerce, businesses value predictability, neutrality and enforceability. Arbitration ticks those boxes. Predictability does not mean you can foresee the outcome, but you receive a final award that is, in principle, not subject to appeal. That gives parties closure. There is also perceived predictability in the fact that parties can generally influence the choice of the arbitrator(s).
Neutrality is another cornerstone. Arbitration allows disputes to be resolved in a neutral forum, often with decision-makers who have no affiliation with either party’s home jurisdiction. And enforceability is perhaps arbitration’s greatest strength. Under the New York Convention, arbitral awards can be enforced in more than 170 countries. That global enforceability is far more extensive than what is typically available for court judgments outside regional frameworks such as the EU.
Where do you see the biggest disconnect between business expectations and legal reality when it comes to arbitration?
The largest gap lies between speed and cost expectations on the one hand, and due process requirements on the other. Businesses understandably want disputes resolved quickly and at the lowest possible cost. Arbitration, however, is built on principles of fairness and due process. That can sometimes make the process more complex, time-consuming and costly than parties initially expect.
The flip side is that this thorough process leads to a well-reasoned decision that parties can live with and move on from, rather than a quick fix that leaves one side dissatisfied. There is also sometimes a misconception about ‘finality.’ While arbitral awards are final in principle, they can still be challenged on limited grounds.
What do you see as the added value of ICC arbitration specifically?
The ICC is widely regarded as the gold standard of institutional arbitration. It is one of the most recognised and frequently used arbitral institutions worldwide. A key differentiator is the scrutiny of awards by the ICC Court. Every award is reviewed before it is issued. That quality control mechanism is relatively unique and adds significant robustness to the process.
The ICC also benefits from highly experienced administration and case management teams. Given the volume of cases handled, the institutional knowledge and expertise are substantial. Its global reach is another advantage. The ICC has access to arbitrators across jurisdictions and sectors, ensuring both diversity and the necessary local or technical expertise. In addition, the ICC Rules are regularly updated and include tools such as expedited proceedings and emergency arbitration, reflecting technological and sectoral developments.
If you could give one piece of advice to Dutch companies entering international contracts in 2026, what would it be?
Do not treat the dispute resolution clause as boilerplate. Draft it carefully, taking into account the specific business relationship and the geopolitical context. Think about enforcement risks, choice of seat, applicable law, procedural rules and unforeseen circumstances.
Too often, dispute resolution clauses are copy-pasted at the last minute. Once a dispute arises, it is usually too late to find common ground on how to resolve it. It is far better to make thoughtful arrangements while the relationship is still healthy. Choosing a reputable institution, selecting a pro-arbitration seat and seeking proper legal advice can make a decisive difference.
How can arbitrators, external counsel and in-house counsel work together more effectively?
Although arbitration is adversarial, all stakeholders share a common objective: a fair, efficient and effective resolution of the dispute. We should perhaps approach arbitration more often with a project management mindset. That means adhering to timelines, focusing on issues that truly matter, avoiding unnecessary length in submissions and working collaboratively to shape an efficient process.
Cultural differences can add complexity, but they also make arbitration an interesting and enjoyable field to work in. It is essential that arbitrators and counsel bridge those gaps and create a process that both parties can understand and accept.
What trends and developments will shape arbitration practice in the next 5-10 years?
Several developments are already here at our doorstep. First, disputes in sectors such as technology, life sciences, energy and financial services – particularly fintech and digital assets – will continue to grow. The rise of digital currencies, artificial intelligence and data-driven business models will generate new types of disputes.
Second, arbitration will become increasingly digital and interdisciplinary. Cases will require technical expertise in engineering, data science or emerging technologies, alongside legal expertise.
Third, ESG and climate-related disputes are likely to increase. While many such cases are currently brought before state courts, more contracts now include arbitration clauses, which means arbitration will increasingly deal with green finance, greenwashing and climate-related claims.
Geopolitical fragmentation is another major driver. Sanctions, trade controls, tariffs and disputes involving state-owned entities will continue to shape the arbitration landscape.
Finally, we will see more multi-tier dispute resolution clauses combining arbitration with mediation, expert determination or negotiation. Arbitration will increasingly be part of a broader dispute resolution toolkit.
What advice would you give your younger self starting out in arbitration?
Be deliberate and strategic about your career choices. Arbitration is highly competitive and internationally attractive. Seek out opportunities to gain hands-on experience. Learn from experienced practitioners. Master the facts; arbitration is fundamentally about understanding the record inside out. Networking is also crucial. Arbitration is a people’s business. Knowing the players – including arbitrators, counsel and institutional representatives – is important both for professional development and for staying up-to-date.
Above all, never take the learning process for granted and immerse yourself fully in the craft.
Marc Krestin
Attorney-at-law specialising in international dispute resolution
Partner at Fieldfisher
