Rotating Case Managers and Dualist Systems: Arbitration Challenges for 2026
Ricardo Vásquez, Mónica van der Schraft, Adrián Simons, Ximena Vial and Fernando Rabat.
Published in Idealex.press
The new generations pose a challenge for the administrative management of arbitrations, as the turnover of assistants and secretaries may affect the smooth conduct of arbitral proceedings.
By Felipe Riffo
According to the Arbitration and Mediation Center of the Santiago Chamber of Commerce (CAM Santiago), case managers are lawyers who belong to the Arbitration and Mediation Units and are responsible for supporting the proper functioning of arbitration, mediation and dispute board proceedings. Their work consists of assisting the parties, their representatives, arbitrators and mediators throughout the proceedings, in a role that is generally less visible than that of the members of the arbitral tribunal.
In recent years, the arbitration sector has discussed the high turnover of case managers, a phenomenon that, according to various stakeholders, has affected the continuity and flexibility of proceedings by preventing assistants from remaining in their roles long enough to acquire specialized experience.
Ricardo Vásquez, partner at Vásquez Urra Abogados, argues that, ideally, these functions should be performed by professionals assigned to them on a more stable and permanent basis.
“This is a complex issue because, essentially, what CAM Santiago provides is a support service. It is a different type of secretariat from those of, for example, ICSID, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, or the ICC, the International Chamber of Commerce, where case managers are actively involved in the cases and provide much broader support, from organizing hearings to drafting procedural orders and reviewing awards,” he says, adding that this is not currently the case at CAM Santiago.
From the perspective of Mónica van der Schraft, international arbitrator and partner at MVJV Arbitration, the turnover of case managers reflects a broader trend among younger generations and in today’s labour market: “Mobility among young professionals is not a phenomenon that affects only those working in arbitration. It cuts across virtually all areas of law and, more generally, most professions.”
Within that age group, there tends to be a greater willingness to change jobs in search of new professional opportunities. However, when these positions are held by more stable professionals, “it becomes easier to provide effective support, because the learning curve is not constantly being repeated.”
The arbitrator adds that young professionals come from highly diverse backgrounds. Some have worked in law firms, others have already served as case managers, and some come from other areas connected to the field. They enter a discipline that is undergoing transformation and facing challenges that differ from those encountered by previous generations: “Today, research can be much easier due to greater access to sources and the digitization of information. However, the workload may also be more intense as a result of the growing popularity of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms,” she explains.
A similar situation can be observed in other jurisdictions, such as Peru. Arbitration and litigation lawyer Adrián Simons, partner at Simons & De Noriega, states that Peruvian arbitration is experiencing a double turnover, both in the secretariats of arbitral institutions and among the assistants of individual arbitrators: “In many cases, the new generations are not willing to go through the entire learning process required by this practice, which involves not only assisting an arbitrator for a few months, but accompanying the full development of each proceeding administered by an arbitral centre.”
Many young lawyers, he says, seek immediate results in relation to their professional expectations, including the possibility of acting as arbitrators without having acquired sufficient experience. In his view, working as an arbitral secretary is an enormously valuable training ground: “That is where one learns not only how an arbitration unfolds or how a tribunal reasons, but also how counsel present their cases, which strategies are best regarded, and which create a negative impression among arbitrators.”
For Simons, the solutions lie mainly in two areas. First, he proposes that arbitration be included as a mandatory course in law schools. Second, he suggests that arbitral centres strengthen their recruitment and training mechanisms for future assistants and secretaries, becoming true arbitration schools aimed at preparing the next generations of arbitrators.
As he puts it: “Those who join should feel that this experience is part of their professional development and future aspirations. Arbitral centres should provide them with solid training so that, in the future, they may be included on panels of arbitrators and understand the role of secretary as an added value in their careers.”
Monist System: Legal Certainty, Predictability and Shorter Timeframes
Looking at the ideal scenario, Ricardo Vásquez argues that it would be desirable for Chile to move towards a monist system, in which the rules applicable to domestic and international arbitration are the same, leaving behind the current dualist model that regulates both fields differently: “This has a direct impact on our system of recourse, where there is a duality between annulment proceedings in international matters and complaints and cassation appeals on procedural grounds in domestic arbitration.”
“That difference generates divergent case law and also causes delays in proceedings which, although conceived as alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, often end up becoming lengthy litigation,” he explains.
In addition, “complaints often prolong proceedings unnecessarily and, combined with the courts’ workload, mean that an arbitration that should last one year may end up taking twice as long,” he adds.
In the Peruvian context, Adrián Simons believes that the monist system currently in force offers significant advantages: “Peruvian arbitration standards are exactly the same for domestic and international arbitration. This provides legal certainty and predictability. In a recent case, in which we advised a highway concessionaire, we obtained recognition by the Commercial Chamber of the Superior Court of Lima of a partial award rendered in Paris, applying a single set of rules: the Peruvian Arbitration Law. The very same provisions that govern domestic commercial arbitration were applied.”
In Simons’ view, maintaining two different systems generates unnecessary debate, particularly around concepts such as domestic public policy and international public policy, disputes that could be resolved automatically under a unified model.
For her part, Mónica van der Schraft, from Chile, notes that the adoption of a monist system has long been an aspiration within Chilean arbitration, although she does not consider it an urgent need: “I do not know whether it is the main problem, because my impression is that the system is in good health. I do not see the fact that we have a dualist model as having reduced the use of arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. That said, from a legal standpoint, moving towards a unified regulation does seem more coherent.”
In her view, arbitration in Chile works properly and, in general terms, both proceedings and awards are respected and enforced. However, she warns that there are other jurisdictions where greater restrictions are imposed and where efforts are made to limit the scope of arbitration or disregard its outcomes: “In any event, I believe the international trend points towards ever-greater recognition of this mechanism. Here, moreover, arbitrators have been recognized under our procedural legislation for a very long time.”
Delays in many commercial courts when enforcing arbitral awards are among the criticisms raised by Adrián Simons. According to him, this situation is aggravated by the improper use of constitutional protection actions against arbitral decisions, interim measures and awards. “According to the standards of the Lima Chamber of Commerce, an arbitration usually lasts between one and a half and two years, excluding especially complex cases. However, in my professional experience, enforcing an award may take another two years, which is entirely pathological,” he says.
As to the causes of these delays, Simons mentions several factors, including the lack of specialization of some judges and the incorrect application of the arbitration law, which provides for very limited grounds to oppose enforcement: “Parties are being allowed to raise defences as if this were ordinary litigation, generating incidental proceedings that greatly delay compliance with the award. The main problem lies in the first-instance commercial courts, where enforcement arrives late, poorly, or not at all.”
New Developments in CAM Santiago’s Statistics
In late April, CAM Santiago held its Fourth Arbitration and Mediation Meeting, where it presented an overview of the state of the arbitration industry during 2025.
As of 31 December 2025, CAM Santiago had received a total of 7,542 arbitration and mediation requests. During that year alone, 489 arbitration requests and 98 mediation requests were filed, according to the institution’s executive director, Ximena Vial.
Of the 489 arbitration requests recorded, 451 corresponded to domestic arbitrations, 27 to emergency arbitrations and 11 to international arbitrations. Emergency proceedings increased by 13% compared with 2024, with the construction sector being the most represented.
Most of these requests were related to precautionary measures, mainly prohibitions on entering into acts and contracts. In these cases, the average processing time was 5.4 days from the arbitrator’s acceptance to the final decision.
In domestic arbitration, the industries with the highest participation were real estate, construction and infrastructure, commercial companies and energy. The average duration of these proceedings was 20 months. In addition, arbitrator appointments made by agreement of the parties represented 20.7% of the requests filed.
“These figures reflect two particularly relevant aspects of domestic arbitration administered by CAM Santiago. On the one hand, they show limited and predictable processing times, which reinforces the efficiency of the mechanism. On the other hand, they reveal a significant level of appointments by agreement of the parties, demonstrating their confidence in the system and their ability to participate actively in the constitution of the arbitral tribunal,” Vial stated.
With regard to awards rendered during 2025, 47% were challenged. However, only 5.3% of those challenges were upheld. In the institution’s view, this shows that although arbitral awards are frequently challenged, the judiciary maintains a largely deferential and restrictive approach to their review, intervening only in exceptional cases.
In international arbitration, the main subject matters involved were commercial companies, energy, and construction and infrastructure. According to the report presented, no annulment request against international awards administered by CAM Santiago has ever been upheld to date, as such actions have either been rejected, declared inadmissible by the courts, or withdrawn by the claimants.
In addition, the alliance with the Madrid International Arbitration Center (CIAM) has enabled more than 25 CAM Santiago members to participate in the institution’s working groups, and a Chilean arbitrator is currently hearing a case administered by that institution.
In mediation, 50% of filings corresponded to requests without a prior clause, that is, voluntary proceedings. The real estate sector accounted for the largest number of cases, followed by partition matters and construction and infrastructure. As to the outcome of these processes, 56% concluded with an agreement, while the average duration was 75 days. “This shows that more and more users recognize the value of the mechanism beyond a contractual obligation,” Vial commented.
During the event, the Minister of Justice and Human Rights, Fernando Rabat, highlighted the importance of alternative dispute resolution methods and welcomed the mediation bill currently under discussion in Congress, noting that it could help ease the burden on civil courts through more effective and collaborative solutions. He also summarized the main aspects of the bill that seeks to allow members of co-owned property communities to resolve their disputes through faster and more accessible procedures, eliminating mandatory arbitration in certain cases.
Other publications:
— Mónica van der Schraft Takes Part in International Arbitration Events in Madrid
— New ICC Rules: Transparency and Efficiency in International Arbitration
