The Saudi Center for Commercial Arbitration has moved from a young institution to the default seat for a growing share of the Kingdom's commercial disputes. With that maturity, tribunals have raised the bar for the experts who appear before them. The opinion that was persuasive five years ago is now the opinion that gets tested.
Independence has to be visible
Tribunals no longer take independence on assertion. They look for it in the work: a method chosen before the conclusion, assumptions stated and sourced, and a willingness to record the points that cut against the instructing party. An expert who only ever helps the side that retained them is an expert a tribunal discounts.
Method over conclusion
The strongest expert evidence is reproducible. Another competent expert, given the same data and the same method, should reach the same number. We build reports so the tribunal can follow the reasoning step by step, rather than being asked to trust a figure. That transparency is what survives a skilled cross-examination.
Preparing the witness, not just the report
A report is only as good as the testimony that defends it. Preparation means rehearsing the hard questions, knowing where the analysis is strongest and where it is merely defensible, and conceding the small point to protect the central one. Experts who cannot do this lose credibility on a detail and take the whole opinion down with it.
What this means for parties
If you are heading toward an SCCA arbitration, the expert work cannot be an afterthought bolted on before the hearing. The independence, the method, and the preparation all have to be built in from the start — which is exactly where the case is won or lost.