A dispute can be strong and still not be ready to file.
Readiness asks a different question from merits. Is the arbitration agreement usable? Are preconditions satisfied? Is evidence organised? Is quantum supportable? Is the counterclaim understood? Are target assets known? Can the company fund and manage the process?
Arbitration Readiness Scoreboard
Filing readiness should measure whether the claim is ready—not merely whether counsel can draft a notice.
The Filing Readiness Score
Convert raw matter information into a structured business decision.
The Filing Readiness Score
Dispute decision pathwayProceed if business economics also justify filing.
Repair identified gaps before commencement.
Filing now risks avoidable procedural or evidential weakness.
Reconstruct case architecture first.
What can move the score or the decision.
The framework should be refreshed when a material assumption changes.
Agreement
Can the correct parties be bound and the claim brought under the clause?
Preconditions
Have notices / escalation / time bars been handled?
Proof
Does each required legal proposition have supporting evidence?
Quantum
Can the pleaded number survive expert / documentary scrutiny?
Counterclaim
What respondent case will filing activate?
Recovery
Where will an award actually be pursued?
Intelligence should end with an owner and a next action.
The output is useful only if it changes the management of the matter.
Contract, pleadings, evidence, financial and asset data.
Map issues into a repeatable decision framework.
Apply legal / financial / executive human judgment.
Record recommendation, assumptions and owner.
Update when material evidence, procedure or recovery facts move.
One institution can connect risk, documents, hearings and enforcement.
The live Risk Analyser measures five core case factors; the Readiness Score adds filing-gateway and preparation disciplines so case strength is not confused with procedural readiness.
Reports accumulate around the case.
Each issue is analysed in isolation and the business has to assemble the decision itself.
The matter develops one intelligence history.
Inputs are converted into a repeatable decision framework and linked to the institutional lifecycle.