An independent US arbitrator has told Starbucks to pay $2.76bn in damages and other costs to Kraft Foods in a dispute over packaged coffee. The deal was due to run until March 2014 but the US coffee chain ended the contract in 2010, accusing Kraft of breaking the terms of their deal. “We’re pleased that the arbitrator validated our position said Mondelez whereas Starbucks said it “strongly disagreed” with the conclusions of the arbitrator.

The article discuses issues between Kraft foods and Starbucks and how the involvement of an arbitrator led to conflict of interest between the two parties. So what I’m trying to understand is whether or not the involvement of an arbitrator results in reducing or increasing the initial problem?