This article was originally published in The Global Arbitration Review
Although it is probably better to refer to an expert as a communicator rather than an advocate, expert opinions do form part of the way a case is advanced, and for this reason, the expert has a role throughout the proceedings.
In the latest Global Arbitration Review, A&M's Luke Steadman aims to identify the expert’s role at each stage of the arbitral process and to discuss how to get the best out of the expert in a way that contributes effectively to the advancement of the case, bearing in mind the expert’s role as a communicator, not an advocate.
Read the full article
The Evolution of Evidence in Disputes and Investigations: Challenges in Navigating Technological Progress and Global Regulation
May 21, 2026
In this article, Dr. Andreas Tauer and Christoph Hörauf explore how technological change, regulatory complexity, and AI are reshaping evidence in disputes and investigations, the risks introduced by growing volumes of digital data, and the key considerations for maintaining integrity and defensibility.
GIR Guide to Monitorships: Understanding and validating systems, processes and controls relevant to remediation
May 13, 2026
In this chapter of the GIR Guide to Monitorships, forensic professionals detail how organizations test and embed control enhancements to address root causes and drive lasting change.
A Note on the Foreign Subsidies Regulation: Economic Evidence in Assessing Foreign Subsidies
May 7, 2026
The EU’s Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR) empowers the European Commission (EC) to scrutinise financial support granted by non-EU public authorities to undertakings active in the EU internal market. This note focuses on the impact of the FSR on concentrations.
Experts on the Stand: Brazilian Arbitration Between Judicial Tradition and International Practice
April 30, 2026
In this article, Managing Directors Leonardo Florencio and Rodrigo Mattos analyze why expert evidence in Brazilian arbitration often departs from international best practices, how excessive reliance on tribunal-appointed experts increases cost and delay, and what the ICC Brazil Task Force recommends to improve efficiency and credibility.
