Interviews with Our Editors: In Conversation with The Honourable Dato’ Mary Lim Thiam Suan, Inaugural President of the Asian International Arbitration Centre Court of Arbitration

Dato’ Mary Lim Thiam Suan is the inaugural President of the Asian International Arbitration Centre (“AIAC”) Court, appointed with effect from 1 January 2026. Prior to this appointment, she served as the Director of the AIAC from August 2024 to December 2025. Dato’ Mary Lim is also a Judge of the Bahrain International Commercial Court (“BICC”) and the Dubai International Financial Centre (“DIFC”) Courts.

Earlier in her career, Dato’ Mary Lim spent over 25 years in the Attorney General’s Chambers of Malaysia. Thereafter, Dato’ Mary Lim served as a judge in the Malaysian judiciary from 2009 to 2024, including appointments as a Judge of the New Commercial Court (High Court of Malaya), the first Judge of the Construction Court in Kuala Lumpur, a Judge of the Court of Appeal, and finally a Judge of the Federal Court. During her time as a judge, she was responsible for handing down judgments that have shaped the law on arbitration in Malaysia. Dato’ Mary Lim is also an Honorary Bencher of Lincoln’s Inn and a Visiting Professor of Hainan University and Guangxi University.

Dato' Mary Lim, thank you for joining us today! We look forward to hearing your insights on the future of the AIAC and developments on arbitration in the region.

1.  The AIAC Court’s 26 inaugural members have been drawn from 15 jurisdictions, across judicial, practice, and academic backgrounds. How will the AIAC Court and its diverse membership transform the administration of cases by the AIAC?

Diversity in every sense is a vital element in the AIAC’s reforms as reflected in our AIAC Arbitration Rules 2026 and in the composition of the members of the AIAC Court of Arbitration. This diversity is deliberate, reflective of the AIAC’s commitment to meeting the needs of the community that it serves. The sum effect of the expertise and experiences of this lineup of diverse eminent jurists in the field of alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) is the elevation and enhancement of the administration of ADR by the AIAC. Parties and arbitral tribunals can expect their arbitrations, adjudications and mediations to be administered according to the highest standards of professionalism as practiced by leading international arbitral institutions.

2.  How will your diverse experiences, including as a state legal advisor, parliamentary draftsperson, senior federal counsel and judge, shape your approach to your new role as President of the AIAC Court?

From each posting and appointment, I picked up new skills and know-how, including how to deal with private citizens from policy and governance perspectives, almost like following the life of a contract from concept to tender, execution to breach, disputes to resolutions. Unfortunately, none of those postings included a stint at some international body, whether corporate or institutional. However, those same appointments exposed me to a huge awareness of what is required for the AIAC to survive, prosper and lead in the administration of ADR in this region. To a large extent, I was and am a part of the history and journey of the AIAC, from when it was the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre for Arbitration (“KLRCA”) to what it is today. The experiences, expertise and skills I learnt are extremely relevant and beneficial to my specific role and function as the President of the AIAC Court of Arbitration. I am fully aware of how important it is that integrity is not a cliché, but that there must be living manifestations of that integral principle.

3.  The AIAC, formerly known as the KLRCA, was established in 1978 and has grown to administer both domestic and international arbitrations, with particular experience in construction-related disputes. The AIAC has also developed specific rules for sports arbitration and Islamic arbitration. What are your views on the AIAC’s role in charting the future trajectory of the regional arbitration scene, including in some of these areas of specialisation?

The AIAC’s role and place in institutional administration of ADR in Asia and the ASEAN region is part of her proud heritage. The AIAC is actually part of the rise of Asian arbitral institutions, to complement those in the West, established specifically for this region. Whilst co-existence and collaboration between international arbitral institutions are vital to the success and continued survival of all institutions, so are innovation and adaptation. Recognizing this, the AIAC identified the sophisticated demands of our clients and now has dedicated Islamic and sports arbitration rules in her suite of Rules. Everyone loves sports, Malaysians even more. Our dedicated i-Arbitration Rules are the first in the region. These Rules have third-party funding syariah compliant provisions, again another first in the region.

Together with arbitration, mediation is an attractive choice, with the ease of inter-applicability of both dispute resolution mechanisms. The AIAC also offers dispute avoidance solutions through standard form i-contracts and conventional standard form contracts, specifically for the vibrant construction industry in the region. It is not always about the resolution of disputes, but the avoidance of the same that should be foremost in all relationships; and that is what the AIAC encourages and promotes.

4.  The AIAC Suite of Rules 2026 (“2026 Rules”) also came into force on 1 January 2026. Which rule changes do you expect will have the most impact on AIAC-administered arbitrations?

I am immensely excited about the breadth of mechanisms, procedures and tools available under the 2026 Rules. But, preceding this is the establishment of the AIAC Court of Arbitration with its 26 members from a large cross-section of jurisdictions. The existence of this Court and the distribution of various functions and powers between the AIAC Court of Arbitration, its President and the Registrar, serve to uphold the principles of integrity, transparency, independence and good governance, in accordance with best international practice in ADR and the rule of law.

Under the 2026 Rules, third-party funding has been legalized specifically for arbitrations, giving greater meaning and opportunities in the quest for and access to justice.

In the event that a party makes counterclaims, the 2026 Rules now require parties to raise these counterclaims early in Responses to Notices of Arbitration (Rule 6). This should enhance procedural efficiency and facilitate the determination and collection of deposits for the proper conduct of the arbitrations. 

A new Rule 53 promotes diligence in arbitrations through the introduction of an implied waiver should a party fail to promptly raise any objections on any non-compliance of any Rules, unless the failure to object was justified in the circumstances.

There is also a huge cache of untapped and little-promoted domestic expertise among arbitrators in Malaysia. I am particularly excited about the utilization of this expertise in the now more favoured fast track and summary determination procedures (Rules 7 and 9); and I am confident that the world will benefit from this synergy.

Next, the respect for diversity in appointments is now given greater emphasis. The adoption of our 2026 Rules means real commitment to diversity by parties, arbitral tribunals and the AIAC (see Rules 16.2–16.3).

Then, there is the encouragement of arb-med-arb, arb-med and med-arb (Rule 49) — in any combination, for any number of times. What is paramount is the parties’ relationship, and how it is handled and respected. This is further augmented by Rule 50 where, subject to agreement of the parties, the arbitral tribunal may take steps towards facilitating settlement of the dispute.

5.  Your distinguished career has spanned legal practice, the judiciary, and academia, and has led you from your home country to international judicial institutions such as the BICC and DIFC Courts. What advice would you give to young lawyers looking to develop a long and successful career in international disputes, especially arbitration?

Disputes — especially commercial disputes — are borderless, yet barriers persist. The resolution of disputes outside conventional court systems and doing business with dignity and professionalism remain integral features of our cultural heritage. Indeed, it is fertile territory for nurturing a long and successful career in dispute resolution, domestically and internationally, before any framework.

But, one must stay hungry for knowledge, welcome challenges, and not be afraid to ask for help. It is lonely especially when you do not have a similar travelling companion. Mine came in the aid of seniors who were leagues ahead of me, qualified from entirely different jurisdictions and who spoke in alien parlance. Given time and opportunities, all that will evolve into skill and expertise. The recognition will come, but be patient, stay humble, and remain dedicated to the rule of law. She will champion you.

6.  In light of your 15 years of experience as a judge, what qualities do you think distinguish a ‘good’ arbitrator, and how might this differ from those that distinguish a ‘good’ judge?

Judges are skilled in listening, evaluating and discerning critical facts, and are able to apply correct principles of law to relevant factual contexts. Today’s judges are encouraged to better and more actively manage their cases; and of course, do so with the aid of artificial intelligence. These are in fact procedures and “tools” borrowed from civil arbitral practice.

A good arbitrator continues in that active management role throughout the arbitral process, from the first procedural order to the final award; firm but clear, not afraid to intervene, provide direction and resolve disputes. This is despite not having “inherent jurisdiction”. A good judge should never stray into an arbitration dispute in the name of inherent jurisdiction. That judge should instead develop sound legal jurisprudence for any intervention, which ultimately resounds in support for the arbitral process and outcome.

7.  The AIAC was established pursuant to an agreement between the Malaysian Government and the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization (“AALCO”), an intergovernmental organisation that advises its Member States on international law. The AIAC now also maintains strategic partnerships with arbitration centres spanning Asia Pacific, Middle East, Africa, Europe, North and Central America. How has the AIAC benefited from its intrinsic ties with the AALCO, and what does the AIAC hope to achieve through its international partnerships?

The AIAC’s relationship with AALCO reflects Malaysia’s strong commitment to a better framework for the resolution of disputes, especially commercial disputes. There are now six arbitral institutions established under the aegis of AALCO — in Cairo, Tehran, Lagos, Nairobi and Hong Kong. The AIAC benefits from the support of the 49 Member States of AALCO, speaking with the same ethos and inspiration which first set up the AIAC (then known as the KLRCA). The AIAC hopes to build on that shared platform, acknowledging that some of the Member States have proceeded to develop commercially-based domestic or international arbitral institutions. These developments, many premised on domestic policies, may be harnessed for the common and collective good of the Member States as well as the larger community that we all serve.

8.  You have been active in speaking at events supported by the AIAC on the advancement of women in the legal profession (see here and here). The AIAC’s 2024 Annual Report also highlighted the AIAC’s efforts towards advocating for gender diversity, and celebrated the empanelment of additional female arbitrators and adjudicators as “a positive step towards gender diversity”. How can arbitral institutions play a more prominent role in encouraging diversity and representation in arbitration?

Here, I harken back to my earlier response on the 2026 Rules: the AIAC walks the talk. We lead by example, we support, we mentor, we sponsor. No self-respecting institution can afford to ignore the significance of this larger call. The AIAC has always been part of that clarion call and like other institutions in this region and beyond, we must continue to that drum beat.

Thank you very much, Dato' Mary Lim, for your time and invaluable insights. We wish you and the AIAC continued success.

This interview is part of Kluwer Arbitration Blog’s “Interviews with Our Editors” series. Past interviews are available here.