Law 360's Q&A with Pepper Hamilton's Matthew Adler
This interview was published in the International Arbitration section of Law360 on April 1, 2016. © Copyright 2016, Portfolio Media, Inc., publisher of Law360. It is republished here with permission.
Matthew H. Adler is a partner in the Philadelphia office of Pepper Hamilton LLP, where he chairs the international and domestic arbitration practice group and co-chairs the commercial litigation practice group. He is a past member
of the firm's executive committee.
Adler handles commercial disputes before international, administrative and judicial bodies, including federal and state courts, government agencies, and arbitration panels in the United States and abroad. He has tried cases before
the courts and arbitral panels in a number of different commercial areas, including breach of international supply contracts, sovereign immunity, sale of business, restrictive covenant, intellectual property, insurance coverage,
real estate and lender liability. Adler is a member of the U.S. Secretary of State's Advisory Committee on Private International Law and the State Department's working group on a judgment enforcement treaty. Prior to joining
Pepper, he arbitrated cases on behalf of the United States at the U.S. Department of State's Office of the Legal Advisor. Adler is an adjunct professor at the University of Virginia School of Law.
Q: What attracted you to international arbitration work?
A: The opportunity international arbitration provides to learn about other cultures and legal systems within the context of a skill in dispute resolution that I already had.
Q: What are two trends you see that are affecting the practice of international arbitration?
A: Rather than answer this as two trends, I would comment that there is an ongoing struggle between two themes. One is that U.S. and U.K. lawyers seem to be prevailing on introducing more traditional methods of prehearing "disclosure"
or "discovery" (based on what usage one follows). The other is that arbitration cases are now moving at increasingly slower rates, contrary to arbitration’s mission. There is an obvious tension between these two
themes and the profession is working to resolve it, but it is a struggle.
Q: What is the most challenging case you've worked on and why?
A: An early case against the government of Iran involving the post-Iranian Revolution expropriation of Western oil interests. The case exposed me to the long-simmering dispute between developed and non-developed countries over lost
profits in expropriation cases. Western investors say, "How dare you take my property without just compensation?" Developing countries say, "How dare you take our resources without fairly giving us a stake in our own
future?" It was the entire history of colonialism and post-colonialism in one case, and got me hooked.
Q: What advice would you give to an attorney considering a career in international arbitration?
A: Work in a firm that does international transactions. Be tolerant of other viewpoints. Get used to constant travel and phone calls at times your significant other will strain to understand. Try to teach, since many international
arbitrators are also professors and it is a way to find commonality (and I can assure you from the last 10 years as an adjunct professor also extremely rewarding).
Q: Outside of your firm, name an attorney who has impressed you and tell us why.
A: Gary Born, chairman of the international arbitration practice group at WilmerHale. Sometimes the obvious pick is the right one, and I cannot think of anybody who has advanced scholarship so much while also being such a superb
advocate. He is a model irrespective of one's tenure in this field.
Content contributed by attorneys of Troutman Sanders LLP and Pepper Hamilton LLP prior to April 1, 2020, is included here, together with content contributed by attorneys of Troutman Pepper (the combined entity) after the merger date.