International arbitration meaning

This Checklist sets out essential steps for arbitrators to consider when deploying artificial intelligence (‘AI’) tools, or where AI is involved in arbitral proceedings. Given the fast‑moving nature of the technology and the applicable laws and regulations, please be aware that this is not a comprehensive list and should be treated as such. The Checklist is intended to provide guidance on best practice. Understanding AI Key points Notes Definition of AI Artificial intelligence refers to computer systems’ capacity to exhibit human‑like cognitive functions, such as decision‑making, planning, reasoning and knowledge representation. IBM characterises AI as technology that allows computers and machines to emulate human learning, understanding, problem‑solving, decision‑making, creativity and autonomy. WIPO portrays AI as a branch of computer science focused on building machines and systems capable of performing tasks thought to require human intelligence. Machine learning and deep learning are two branches within AI. In recent years, with advances in neural network methods and hardware, AI is commonly regarded as...

The Checklist seeks to outline the principal actions that arbitrators should consider across the entire course of a proceeding, beginning with appointment and the first procedural order and ending with delivery of the award and completion of their obligations. It offers direction on the types of provisions that may feature in procedural orders addressing data security throughout the duration and lifespan of an arbitration. Please be mindful, in light of the evolving cybersecurity ecosystem and applicable laws and regulations, that this is not an exhaustive catalogue. Rather, the checklist functions as guidance on best practice and clarifies the considerations that may arise at each milestone. Arbitration phase: pre-appointment of the Tribunal Legal Steps Safeguard your digital identity so you are seen as independent and impartial, notwithstanding the difficulties posed by an online presence. Refer to: Checklist for Arbitrators on the Use of Social Media and the Duty of Impartiality—the cybersecurity approach to arbitration. Technical Steps Adopt appropriate cybersecurity practices...

This Checklist offers a concise examination of the hands-on elements involved in the tribunal secretary’s role. Its scope is to steer legal practitioners on considerations when choosing and collaborating with a tribunal secretary. The Checklist expresses no opinion on whether appointing a tribunal secretary is suitable; that determination lies with the parties and the arbitral tribunal case by case—see Practice Note: Tribunal secretaries in international arbitration—the advantages and disadvantages. It draws on the legal framework (primarily arbitration rules), case law/jurisprudence, soft law (guidelines and practice notes), professional experience, and prevailing market practices. Taxonomy Tribunal secretary is an umbrella term for a person who supports an arbitral tribunal (a sole arbitrator or a panel) during arbitration proceedings, assisting the tribunal throughout the conduct of proceedings as the arbitration process advances further...

In this issue: Key DR developments Cross-border disputes Pre-action and limitation Litigation Case management Evidence and disclosure ADR Scottish Dispute Resolution Dates for your diary Useful information Daily and weekly news alerts Key DR developments Guidance and reports Courts and Tribunals Judiciary publishes February 2026 updated edition of the Equal Treatment Bench Book: The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has issued an interim February 2026 update to the Equal Treatment Bench Book. For more information, see: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary publishes February 2026 updated edition Equal Treatment Bench Book—LNB News 26/02/2026 28. HCCH publishes 2025 annual report highlighting private international law developments The Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) has released its 2025 annual report, noting the creation of two new Experts’ Groups to examine private international law topics linked to Digital Tokens and Carbon Markets. For more information, see: HCCH publishes 2025 annual report highlighting private international law...

Honduras rejects the ICSID Convention In recent weeks, Honduras announced it would repudiate the international treaty under which it consented to submit disputes to the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSD), better known as the ICSID Convention. The move followed the country being hit last year with nine distinct ICSID claims, among them a politically charged action brought by a US-based developer seeking up to US$10.7bn in compensation. Honduras now mirrors three other Latin American states that have denounced the ICSID Convention: Ecuador, Bolivia and Venezuela. Across Europe, parliament have also been keen to jettison investment arbitration in favour of a new investor court, promising reforms they believe could rebalance a regime that critics often say tilts towards investors. India, South Africa and New Zealand have likewise taken steps in recent years to curb their exposure to investor–state disputes, so at first sight it may seem these Latin American moves are part of a worldwide revolt against investor–state arbitration. Yet that impression would overlook a...

Oswin v Otila; and Ondray Claim No ARB 032/2025 What was the background? This matter arose from a falling-out between Oswin (the Claimant) and Ondray (the Second Defendant) over how to run their joint venture company, Otila (the First Defendant). Oswin owned 49% of the First Defendant’s shares and Ondray 51%. The board could act only by unanimous vote, while shareholder resolutions required a 75% super-majority. When they were unable to agree on management and operations, the company became deadlocked. Their relationship was governed by a Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) dated 12 March 2019, which included an arbitration clause calling for DIFC-seated proceedings under the DIFC-LCIA Rules. The Claimant also operated a medical and hazardous waste facility under an Operations and Management Agreement due to expire on 21 August 2025. On 15 August 2025, the Claimant issued a Dispute Notice under clause 21.2 of the JVA, alleging that the Second Defendant was assuming strategic decision-making without proper authority—covering directions on renewal of the O&M Agreement, instruction of external...

This Practice Note examines the powers of the arbitral tribunal under the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration Rules (the UNCITRAL Rules). For an introduction to the UNCITRAL Rules, see Practice Note: UNCITRAL Rules—background and introduction. For guidance on appointing the tribunal, see Practice Note: UNCITRAL Rules—appointment of the arbitral tribunal. A core feature of the UNCITRAL arbitration framework is the authority vested in the tribunal. The UNCITRAL Rules grant the arbitral tribunal extensive powers over the management and timetable of the proceedings, evidence, the making of awards, interim measures and the allocation of costs. General power of the arbitral tribunal The tribunal may conduct the proceedings in such manner as it deems appropriate, provided it treats the parties equally and affords each party a reasonable opportunity to present its case (UNCITRAL Rules, Article 17(1)). The broad discretion conferred on the tribunal is a fundamental tenet of UNCITRAL arbitration and is derived from the original 1976 UNCITRAL Rules...

This Practice Note sets out guidance on arbitral awards in proceedings under the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) Administered Arbitration Rules 2018 (2018 HKIAC Rules; HKIAC 2018). As explained in Practice Note: HKIAC (2018)—the HKIAC Administered Arbitration Rules—application and key features, the 2018 HKIAC Rules generally govern HKIAC arbitrations commenced on or after 1 November 2018, save where the parties agree otherwise; for HKIAC arbitrations begun before 1 November 2018, the 2013 HKIAC Rules will generally apply unless the parties agreed otherwise. For an overview of the HKIAC and how it is organised, see Practice Note: HKIAC—background to and structure of the institution. Awards in HKIAC arbitrations In line with most institutional regimes, under the 2018 HKIAC Rules a tribunal may render interim, interlocutory, or partial awards and, in addition to a final award, may issue interim awards as to costs (HKIAC 2018, art 35.1). Where the tribunal has more than one arbitrator, any award or other ruling is to be made by a majority. Failing a...

The Swiss Rules of International Arbitration, updated on 1 June 2021 (the Swiss Rules), apply—unless the parties agree otherwise—to any arbitration begun on or after 1 June 2021 under an arbitration agreement referring either to the Swiss Rules or to the prior rules of chambers or organisations that joined the Swiss Rules or brought their proceedings within them. This Practice Note examines the appointment of the arbitral tribunal under the Swiss Rules. The provisions regulating constitution of the tribunal are, for the most part, consistent with those in most other widely used arbitration rules, though there are a handful of particularities. For guidance on the 2012 Swiss Rules, see: Swiss Rules arbitration—overview. This note highlights similarities and specific features when constituting tribunals, within the context of these Swiss Rules and notes areas of difference. Number of arbitrators Under the Swiss Rules, the parties may decide the size of the arbitral tribunal, either within their arbitration clause or subsequently. While that choice rests with the parties, the Arbitration Court...

To: Singapore International Arbitration Centre28 Maxwell Road, 03–01 Maxwell Chambers SuitesBY [ SPECIFY MODE OF DELIVERY ]Singapore 069115 Attn: The Registrar With copy, including all attachments, to: [ Insert name and address of all Respondents ]BY [ SPECIFY MODE OF DELIVERY ] Dear [ Registrar of SIAC ], We enclose a Notice of Arbitration, now lodged with the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) in accordance with rule 3 of the SIAC Rules of Arbitration, 6th Edition, 2016 (SIAC Rules). A copy is being served on the Respondent(s) by the service method(s) indicated above. The service date is [ insert anticipated date of delivery ]. [ Pursuant to rule 3.1(k) of the SIAC Rules, we attach a local cheque for [ insert amount ], payable to the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, covering the required filing fee. OR Pursuant to rule 3.1(k) of the SIAC Rules, the sum of [ insert amount ], being the requisite filing fees, was remitted on [ insert date ]...

ARCHIVED : This Precedent is archived and no longer actively maintained. It is intended for use in relation to arbitrations conducted under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre 2013 (5th edition) (2013 SIAC Rules). These 2013 SIAC Rules govern any arbitration begun on or after 1 April 2013, unless the parties have agreed a different position...

The Secretariat of the International Court of ArbitrationInternational Chamber of Commerce [ Address of an approved ICC office and by email to the relevant address for the office ] [ Date ] Dear [ ICC Secretariat ], Request for Arbitration : [ Party names ] [ Law firm case reference number ] Please find herewith enclosed our Request for Arbitration submitted pursuant to the 2021 ICC Rules of Arbitration (ICC Rules) [ with accompanying documents ], on behalf of [ name of claimant party or parties ] whom we represent and advise. We additionally enclose [ the filing fee of US$ [X,XXX]. OR A filing fee of US$ [X,XXX] has been made by wire transfer with reference [ insert reference ]. ]. [ The Claimant requests, in accordance with article 4(4)(b) of the ICC Rules, that the Secretariat transmits the Request by delivery against receipt, registered post or courier. We enclose [ number ] of hard copies. ] Please kindly acknowledge safe receipt...