To reason or not to reason: arbitral awards—the conflict between conciseness and the duty to provide reasons under national laws and international rules

Abstract The duty to give reasons in arbitral awards has a mixed history. While it can be traced back to the second part of the 20th century in England, it has been part of accepted practice in civil law countries for a long period. It has become the norm in international arbitration, both in commercial disputes and in investment disputes. While the duty to give reasons is, in general, positive, this article suggests that many international awards tend to be too long. This prolongs the arbitration proceedings and increases costs—both in terms of the arbitrators’ fees and the costs that the parties to dispute must bear while waiting for the award to be issued. To tackle this problem, the article examines the required scope of reasoning in international awards; it then discusses why many international awards tend to be too long. Finally, it suggests ways in which awards can and should be shorter.