It’s well documented that litigation takes more time than adjudication with arbitration. The US District Court Judicial Caseload Profile from June 30, 2025 reported that the median time from filing to trial for civil cases is 34.1 months.[i] By contrast, the median duration of domestic commercial arbitrations – from initial filing to award – is approximately 11 to 12 months.[ii] And it follows that the longer a dispute remains unresolved, the more resources parties must devote to financing its resolution, driving up costs.

Arbitration allows parties to exert meaningful control over both timelines and costs. Parties can save time and money by selecting the right arbitrator and arbitration provider, keeping discovery and motion practice proportional to the dispute, maintaining clear communication throughout the process, stipulating prior to the arbitration hearing and exercising discretion over evidence and witness presentation.

Selecting the Right Arbitrator and Arbitration Provider

Cost and time control begins with arbitrator selection. Choosing an arbitrator with subject-matter expertise relevant to the case reduces the need to educate the decision-maker. Hon. Margaret A. Brennan, (Ret.), senior mediator and arbitrator at ADR Systems, observed that parties benefit when the arbitrator “already understands the legal and factual landscape of the dispute and can focus the process on what truly matters to the outcome.”

Cost considerations also inform whether a single arbitrator or panel is appropriate. Particularly in lower- or mid-value disputes, a sole arbitrator can significantly reduce fees and avoid the scheduling challenges that arise when coordinating multiple decision-makers.[iii] Judge Brennan noted that parties sometimes opt for panels without fully evaluating whether the additional expense is justified by the nature of the dispute.

The arbitration provider’s case management structure also plays a critical role in overall cost. Hon. William J. Haddad, (Ret.), senior mediator and arbitrator at ADR Systems, explained that “active case management by the arbitration provider helps address scheduling and discovery matters early. This keeps the arbitration moving forward expeditiously and can prompt parties to identify or narrow issues in dispute before they become costly points of contention at the hearing.”

Keeping Discovery and Motion Practice Proportional to the Dispute

One of arbitration’s advantages is flexibility in discovery, but that flexibility requires constraint. Discovery should be tailored to the complexity and value of the case, balancing cost containment with the arbitrator’s need for sufficient information to decide the dispute.³

Implementing litigation-style discovery into arbitration risks eroding its time-and cost-saving benefits.[iv] Judge Brennan cautioned that unfocused discovery often “adds expense without adding clarity,” particularly when cumulative evidence does little to advance the arbitrator’s understanding of the core issues in dispute.

Well-managed arbitration discovery focuses on key witnesses and essential documents rather than marginal or duplicative evidence. In appropriate cases, sworn statements or limited depositions can provide the necessary factual foundation without the expense of expansive discovery.

Motion practice should be approached with the same discipline. Procedural motions unlikely to meaningfully advance resolution or streamline the process and all dispositive motions should be evaluated carefully for their cost-benefit impact.³ Extensive motion practice is far less common in arbitration than in court litigation and is often discouraged altogether which saves precious time.⁴

Maintaining Clear Communication with All Parties

Early and ongoing communication between counsel plays a critical role in controlling arbitration costs. When parties wait until the hearing to raise concessions or stipulations, much of the opportunity for cost saving has been lost.

Judge Haddad emphasized that “cost savings require communication and coordination between parties,” especially in complex disputes where misunderstandings can quickly compound expenses. Open dialogue regarding disputed issues, discovery needs and scheduling expectations allows parties to allocate their resources more strategically and avoid unnecessary work.

Case managers can assist in facilitating communication and scheduling discussions, helping to keep the case on track. When communication is prioritized, parties are better positioned to avoid late-stage disputes that increase hearing time and preparation costs.

Remote arbitration options can further support this coordination. Both Judge Brennan and Judge Haddad have noted that virtual proceedings can ease scheduling challenges by allowing counsel, clients, witnesses and arbitrators to convene without the logistical burdens of travel. Remote formats often make it easier to secure mutually available dates and keep matters moving forward.

Stipulating Prior to the Arbitration Hearing

Stipulations offer another way to reduce both preparation time and hearing length. Identifying issues such as foundational facts, document authenticity or certain components of damages and addressing them in advance can eliminate the need for multiple witnesses and extended testimony.3

Judge Haddad explained that “early stipulations often do more to shorten a hearing than any ruling issued on the eve of testimony.” Additionally, parties should consider stipulating to the admissibility of records, invoices or deposition transcripts to streamline the presentation of evidence.

“Resolving evidentiary issues in advance with stipulations allows the hearing to focus on substantive disputes that will drive the arbitrator’s decision,” Judge Brennan added.

Exercising Discretion Over Evidence and Witness Presentation

Arbitration allows parties to make deliberate choices about how evidence and witness testimony are presented at the hearing, which can meaningfully affect both cost and arbitration duration. One such decision is whether live testimony is necessary for every witness, particularly where testimony is largely undisputed or cumulative.

As Judge Brennan described, “When a witness has already been deposed and the testimony is not genuinely in dispute, using the deposition transcript instead of live testimony can save hours of hearing time without diminishing the evidentiary record.”

Similarly, Judge Haddad expressed that, “Agreements regarding witness presentation and the format of evidence can substantially shorten hearings and reduce preparation burdens for all involved.”

By exercising discretion in how evidence is presented, parties can limit unnecessary witness testimony and reduce the volume of exhibits and briefing to allow the arbitrator to focus on the core factual and legal questions that will drive the final award.⁴

Controlling Time & Cost in Arbitration

Arbitration can be less expensive and reduce time spent in dispute resolution when parties make intentional choices at each stage of their case. From the outset, selecting an arbitrator and provider with the right experience can shape how focused and manageable the process will be. Decisions about the scope of discovery and motion practice determine if resources are spent clarifying the dispute, and consistent communication between counsel helps avoid late-stage surprises that drive up preparation and hearing time.

The same is true as the case approaches the hearing. Stipulating undisputed issues narrows the record and limits unnecessary testimony. Thoughtful decisions about which witnesses truly need to appear — and what evidence can be presented by agreement — allow the hearing to concentrate on the questions that will decide the case.

When these choices are made deliberately, arbitration delivers what parties expect when they choose it: a dispute resolution process that remains under their control, proceeds on a reasonable timeline and avoids the escalating costs that so often accompany litigation.

…………

Hon. Margaret A. Brennan, (Ret.) served for 19 years in the Circuit Court of Cook County Chancery and Law Divisions and cultivated expansive knowledge of commercial cases such as employment matters involving discrimination and retaliatory discharge, construction and legal malpractice disputes. Colleagues commend Judge Brennan’s intelligence, persuasiveness, remarkable patience, careful case preparation and boundless energy, which contribute significantly to her success as a senior mediator and arbitrator.

View Judge Brennan’s Full Bio

Request Judge Brennan’s Availability

Hon. William J. Haddad, (Ret.) has spent decades practicing law. Judge Haddad led a civil litigation firm for 18 years, served as a company president and spent 10 years as a Law Division judge in the Circuit Court of Cook County.  His broad background allows Judge Haddad to resolve a wide array of commercial and personal injury disputes.  Judge Haddad is very active in the Chicago legal and business community and has received numerous awards for his service.

View Judge Haddad’s Full Bio

Request Judge Haddad’s Availability

ADR Systems, It’s Settled.®

…………

[i] “U.S. District Courts—Median Time From Filing to Disposition of Civil Cases, by Action Taken—During the 12-Month Period Ending March 31, 2024.” United States Courts, March 31, 2024.

[ii] Mazirow, Esq., CRE, Arthur. THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF ARBITRATION AS COMPARED TO LITIGATION. Los Angeles, 2008.

[iii] Harmon, Kathleen M. “Cost-Effective Strategies for Arbitration.” Leadership and Management in Engineering 4, no. 4 (October 2004): 148–53.

[iv] Sussman, Edna. “Why Arbitrate? The Benefits and Savings.” New York State Bar Association Journal 81, no. 8 (October 2009): 20–24.