Building trust across India’s legal and dispute resolution ecosystem will require greater collaboration among government, in-house counsel, external law firms and other stakeholders, Campbell Jackson, Partner and Global Claims & Disputes Leader at EY, said.
Speaking to ETLegalWorld on the sidelines of the 5th edition of ETLegalWorld’s Commercial Dispute Conclave 2026, Jackson said the discussions highlighted the importance of bringing diverse stakeholders together to develop initiatives aimed at strengthening confidence in India’s dispute resolution framework.
“Building trust requires diverse views from all sectors of the legal community and government, whether it be external law firms, whether it be in-house counsel, or whether it be the Attorney-General,” Jackson said.
He said specific initiatives and working groups involving multiple stakeholders could help in “restoring, building and enhancing” trust in the dispute resolution ecosystem.
However, Jackson said his broader takeaway from his engagements in India was that trust in the country’s legal and commercial ecosystem is already present.
“Ultimately my takeaway from today and this week in India is that trust is there. It’s very exciting from what I’ve seen that’s happening domestically,” he said.
He added that India’s growing presence on the global stage also has implications for confidence in the country among international capital markets.
Timeliness, cost efficiency remain key concerns
Referring to the findings of the EY report discussed at the conclave, Jackson said the timeliness of arbitral awards and cost efficiency emerged as important concerns among respondents.
Two areas, in particular, could help address these concerns — greater use of technology and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms such as mediation, he said.
“One key takeaway from the survey would be the use of AI and technology to be able to do more quickly in a more cost-effective manner,” Jackson said.
He also pointed to growing interest in mediation as a way to address concerns around the time taken for judgments and their enforceability.
Jackson said avoiding disputes in the first place should also remain an important objective for businesses, given the operational disruption, management time and other costs associated with prolonged disputes.
“The appetite towards alternative dispute resolution around mediation” could help mitigate some of these concerns, while also ensuring continuity of operations and reducing management distraction, he said.
Technology can help contain arbitration costs
Jackson said the findings on cost and efficiency were consistent with broader discussions around both domestic and international arbitration.
On arbitration costs, he said arbitral institutions have been working to provide guidelines and structures aimed at containing costs and ensuring that the commercial objectives of arbitration are met.
“The arbitral institutions, from my experience, have worked very hard in terms of providing some guidelines to enhance cost containment,” he said.
Jackson said technology is likely to play a greater role in arbitration proceedings, including in helping tribunals deal with complex issues more efficiently.
“The use of technology, I think is going to become more prevalent,” he said.
He also pointed to the potential role of experts in helping tribunals understand complex issues and focus on the matters most relevant to liability and quantum.
Enforcement remains critical after an arbitral win
Jackson also highlighted enforceability as a key challenge, particularly in international arbitration.
“It’s all very well winning in an arbitral setting, but getting the money at the end of the day through enforcement is a key challenge,” he said.
For businesses considering arbitration, he said the process should be approached with the end result in mind, including whether sufficient assets or funds will be available to satisfy a judgment or award.
“Beginning with the end in mind” means ensuring that there is security for asset recovery and that funds are available to meet a judgment if a party is successful, Jackson said.
This consideration, he added, should be factored in alongside the arbitration proceedings themselves to ensure that a successful outcome ultimately translates into meaningful recovery.
