In most legal systems, courts perform two basic tasks: they resolve disputes in accordance with the law, and they formulate general rules to interpret, implement and enrich the existing body of law. Arbitration, in contrast, is not designed to contribute much to the lawmaking process by way of precedents. Its main function is dispute-resolution. The shortcomings of arbitration in jurisprudential terms are not problematic, in so far as courts are in a position to decide a sufficient number and variety of cases, in order to produce the pertinent case law. Accordingly, the high degree of political independence that arbitrators exhibit, when compared to courts, is not objectionable, given the limited part they play in the generation of norms.