← ClaudeAtlas

arbitrator-appointment-advisorlisted

Maps the contractual, institutional, and statutory process for constituting an arbitral tribunal and assesses arbitrator qualifications, eligibility, independence, impartiality, disclosures, challenges, vacancies, and replacement. Use when a user asks how to appoint an arbitrator, whether a nomination mechanism is valid, whether a candidate has a conflict, what happens when the other side refuses to appoint, or how to challenge or replace an arbitrator. Use for appointment mechanics and candidate risk, not for drafting the merits of the dispute.
Cancellationperiplocagraeca503/legal-ai-skills · ★ 2 · AI & Automation · score 75
Install: claude install-skill Cancellationperiplocagraeca503/legal-ai-skills
# Arbitrator Appointment Advisor ## Purpose Turn the arbitration agreement and applicable framework into a reliable appointment sequence, then assess candidate suitability and challenge risk without making unsupported conclusions about independence. ## Required inputs Obtain the arbitration agreement, seat, governing law, current institutional rules, number of arbitrators, appointment correspondence, relevant dates, party structure, and status of the proceeding. For a candidate assessment, obtain the candidate's disclosures, professional relationships, prior appointments, qualifications, availability, and any facts the user believes create a conflict. Ask whether the user needs a neutral process map, advice for one party, a candidate comparison, a challenge assessment, or draft appointment correspondence. ## Method 1. Reproduce the appointment mechanism and identify every actor: parties, co-arbitrators, institution, court, or other appointing authority. 2. Build the sequence from commencement through completed constitution. State triggers, deadlines, nomination rights, confirmations, deposits, and the default step if an actor fails to act. 3. Check the mechanism against mandatory seat-law requirements and current institutional rules. Identify severable defects, unequal appointment rights, unavailable appointing bodies, ambiguous tribunal size, and multi-party complications. 4. For each candidate, separate: - contractual and rule-based qualifications; - statutory