We are taking a variety of precautions to combat the global pandemic, from further lockdowns to banning in-person meetings. Despite the challenges of adopting novel procedures and cutting-edge technology, the court system, particularly in arbitration, has continued to run throughout the pandemic. Although technology has been utilised in high court litigation and international arbitration for quite some time (particularly in the Technology & Construction Court), this use has been somewhat limited because the parties, their attorneys, and the tribunal frequently prefer in-person hearings and hard copy documents. The use of technology in the processes of conflict settlement, on the other hand, saw a significant increase in 2021. Instead of necessarily being the consequence of choice or organic development, this was probably certainly brought about by necessity as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Parties were forced to learn how to use remote hearings, electronic bundles, and virtual breakout rooms if disputes were to continue to be settled. The transition to virtual hearings and electronic working proved mainly successful, with many conflicts being quickly handled along the way, even though certain unavoidable technological and logistical challenges were encountered. The transition to virtual hearings and electronic working proved mainly successful, with many conflicts being quickly handled along the way, even though certain unavoidable technological and logistical challenges were encountered. Can in-person hearings ever be totally replaced by remote ones? There will likely be an excellent reason to handle some interlocutory concerns remotely and more important things in person, according to several arguments. From case to case, it will differ. Then there is the question of fairness and natural justice, as well as whether an unhappy party can insist on having in-person hearings. Is in-person or remote cross-examination effective? Absent the observations of body language and behaviour that will be a measure used, although by the subconscious thought process, can the arbitrator build a sense of the credibility of a fact witness? In any case, the use of technology and remote hearings will increase in the future. Having said that, it makes perfect sense to have regulatory advice in place for the arbitrator and parties as to the dos and don'ts of working remotely and electronically to ease at least some of the issues that have been raised.