Arbitration is often described as faster and cheaper than litigation—but how true is that in practice?

In this Paralegal to Partner feature, Gideon Rix draws on a decade of experience behind the scenes of international arbitrations to offer a candid, practitioner’s perspective.

If you could give one piece of advice to your younger self at the start of your legal career, knowing what you know now, what would it be?

One piece of advice I would offer is to trust your judgment, Identify senior lawyers whose careers you wish to emulate, and learn to work exactly as they do before attempting to develop your own style.

What is one legal skill junior lawyers obsess over that matters far less than they think — and one they underestimate entirely?

I have observed that, throughout my career, junior lawyers often obsess over making their legal writing appear formal and almost Dickensian. There is a general belief that legal writing must be serious and formal in tone, and an attempt to achieve this can have almost absurd results. However, what junior lawyers frequently fail to recognize that it is far more important to write in a simple and easily understood manner.

Outside of black-letter law, what makes a genuinely excellent litigator in 2026?

I think a genuinely excellent litigator has to have some understanding of the industry in which they are litigating. It isn’t enough to just understand the law; you have to understand how your client’s business works.

Litigation over contracts is rarely going to be decided purely on the contents of a contract. It will depend largely on the industry in which that contract was signed and an understanding of how that business operates, what is standard, what is commercial, what makes sense, and what does not. A black-letter lawyer who may have a perfect understanding of the law may fail to understand that the arguments he’s making may be technically correct, but they will have catastrophic consequences for the client if they are pursued.

What case (public or personal) completely changed the way you think about litigation?

Every case I take on changes how I think about litigation. A good litigator is always learning and developing.  When your understanding of litigation becomes static, you become outdated.

In terms of cases that have left a lasting impression beyond all the others, as a junior lawyer I once worked on a case in which our client, a liquidator of a company, was forced to take action the did not want to take, filing a claim against a former director who had done everything to help his former employees, but due to a legal technicality, was being pursued. All parties wished to reach some form of solution to avoid an innocent man being made bankrupt. Eventually a settlement was reached that all parties were happy with.

The lasting lesson I took away from that case, was that sometimes parties have no choice but to take legal action. Second, Parties can always settle a dispute, if there is sufficient will to do so.