P&K Interview: Introducing Haakon Bingen

We welcomed Haakon Bingen to the Peter & Kim partnership in February 2026. In this interview we learn a bit more about Haakon, his experience and expertise and why he joined the firm.

Having just recently joined Peter & Kim, what do you think sets the firm apart in the market?

Prior to joining I had followed the firm for some years. It was striking how uncompromisingly the firm had pursued its ambitions within international arbitration — and the results speak for themselves.

In the course of my first few months, I have had the opportunity to collaborate with colleagues across all offices, and I have been particularly impressed by the depth of experience and capacity the firm possesses, both within the individual offices and at every level of the organisation. What truly sets Peter & Kim apart, in my view, is the combination of deep specialisation and genuine international reach. The firm does not merely maintain offices in different jurisdictions — it has integrated teams that work seamlessly across borders, bringing local expertise to bear on complex cross-jurisdictional disputes. There is also a strong culture of collaboration and knowledge-sharing, which means that clients benefit from the collective experience of the entire firm, not just the team in a single office. The strong “one firm” culture, is a significant competitive advantage in international arbitration, where understanding the interplay between different legal systems and procedural traditions is essential.

You bring extensive experience across multiple jurisdictions, underpinned by a strong Nordic perspective. Why do you think it is important for a law firm to bring together lawyers of different backgrounds, training and jurisdictional experience?

Over the years I have been counsel in cases governed by numerous different substantive and procedural laws, and while the law and facts always differ, the underlying analytical skills and strategic thinking required are remarkably transferable. Having worked across civil law and common law traditions, I have seen first-hand how different legal cultures approach the same problem from different angles. A lawyer trained in one system may instinctively identify issues or solutions that a lawyer from another tradition might overlook. When you bring those perspectives together within a single team, you get a far more robust and creative approach to case strategy. In representing clients as counsel and when sitting as arbitrator in international arbitrations, you meet clients, counsel and arbitrators with different legal backgrounds and perspectives. The only way to properly assess the disputes is to understand and anticipate how the other side — and the tribunal — will approach the issues. A tribunal composed of arbitrators from different jurisdictions will inevitably bring different expectations regarding procedure, evidence, and legal reasoning. If your team has that same diversity of perspective, you are far better equipped to present your case in a manner that resonates with the decision-makers. This is why I believe it is so important for a firm like Peter & Kim to cultivate a genuinely multi-jurisdictional team that we are today, with more than 15 jurisdictions covered internally and 18 different languages.

You have also sat as an arbitrator in many cases. How do you think this dual perspective benefits the firm’s clients when acting as counsel?

Counsel work has always been and will remain my main occupation. However, sitting as arbitrator has materially informed my counsel work. When sitting as sole arbitrator or as arbitrator in a tribunal, you observe where submissions succeed and where they fall short. You observe how an overly complex case structure makes the arguments less accessible and the consequences thereof, how a tribunal weighs competing evidence, and what it takes for witness testimony to move the needle. You also develop a sharper sense of how tribunals manage procedure. This practical insight allows me to tailor submissions and hearing strategy in a way that is more attuned to how tribunals actually operate.

Furthermore, it has enabled me to gain insights into disputes within industries I might otherwise not have been introduced to. Having specialised in all things energy arbitration, and worked as counsel on numerous oil and gas disputes, I would rarely be free to act as arbitrator in such matters due to potential conflicts. However, the knowledge of the procedure and the experience from handling very large and complex cases with hostile and sometimes numerous parties, for example in a joint venture context, are very largely applicable also to other disputes like shareholder disputes, or post-M&A disputes — areas in which I have sat as arbitrator several times. This cross-pollination of experience is invaluable. It broadens your understanding of how different industries structure their commercial relationships and allocate risk, which in turn enriches the advice you can give to clients in your core practice area. Ultimately, the dual role makes you a more well-rounded practitioner and a more effective advocate.

You are involved in supporting and mentoring the next generation of future arbitration lawyers. Why is fostering young talent so important?

From a macro perspective, if we do not invest in developing young talent, we risk a decline in the quality of both advocacy and decision-making, which would ultimately undermine confidence in arbitration as an institution. However, and more personally, to me mentoring is not a one-way street. Working with younger lawyers forces me to articulate and re-examine assumptions. They bring other perspectives, and often a willingness to challenge conventional thinking that is healthy for the matter. I have always found that the best teams are those where experienced practitioners and younger lawyers work closely together, each learning from the other. At Peter & Kim, I have been pleased to see that this ethos is deeply embedded in the firm’s culture.

Drawing from your extensive arbitration experience, what trends or developments do you foresee in the field of international arbitration? Are there any changes or initiatives you hope to contribute to?

There are several developments that I find particularly significant:

• First, the intersection of geopolitics and arbitration will continue to generate complex and novel disputes, in particular within “my” sector of energy disputes, but also in general. Sanctions, trade restrictions, and political measures are not going away, and the affected industries will continue to seek experienced arbitration counsel committed to their case and to develop its expertise to navigate these issues.
• Second, the growing use of technology, including artificial intelligence, in the preparation and presentation of cases will transform how we work. While the fundamentals of advocacy and legal reasoning will remain unchanged, the tools at our disposal are evolving rapidly, and we must embrace them thoughtfully.
• Finally, I believe that diversity will continue to be a priority for the arbitration community. A more diverse pool of arbitrators and counsel leads to better decision-making and greater legitimacy. I am committed to supporting initiatives that promote this, whether through mentoring, institutional engagement, or simply by example in the cases I handle.