Artificial intelligence (AI) is making its way into international arbitration, offering increased efficiency and lower costs, but experts caution that its use must be carefully limited. The topic was discussed in a March 31 article that examined both the promise and challenges of AI in this legal field.
The integration of AI matters because it could transform how disputes are resolved across borders. While AI can draft precise clauses, analyze large volumes of documents quickly, assist with arbitrator selection, streamline administrative tasks, manage evidence, and provide predictive analysis on arguments’ success rates, there are concerns about replacing human arbitrators with technology.
The article points out that although nothing theoretically prevents parties from appointing a “robot arbitrator,” the practical application raises significant issues. Arbitration involves judgment and responsibility—qualities still uniquely human. “The key is not to reject artificial intelligence but to use it appropriately. This means assuming that AI is a powerful tool but fallible; useful but not autonomous; efficient but lacking judgment,” the article says.
Risks associated with using AI include bias—which can reflect or amplify existing inequalities—algorithmic opacity (difficulty explaining decisions), and so-called hallucinations where false information appears credible. Recent cases have shown lawyers citing non-existent case law generated by AI tools with disciplinary consequences.
A consensus is emerging among regulators and practitioners: The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act classifies systems used in justice administration as high risk and requires transparency, human oversight, and explainability. Various guidelines also stress technological competence for arbitrators without delegating decision-making to machines or compromising confidentiality.
Ultimately, while technology can enhance arbitration processes, the final decision—and responsibility—should remain with humans. As stated: “Artificial intelligence may assist the arbitrator but never replace them.” Looking ahead, the future of arbitration will likely be hybrid rather than entirely human or purely artificial.
