Introduction

An international arbitral tribunal typically consists of three members. Each of them has an equal vote, with the majority ruling. The ultimate disposition of the case, therefore, is usually expected to represent the common will of at least two tribunal members. But what if there is no commonality of "will"? What if each of the arbitrators espouse mutually irreconcilable views about how the case should be decided? What if the "minority" (dissenting) voice seems to align itself with one of the "majority"? What if a "concurring" opinion (written by one of the majority members) seems ...