header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
21 February 2025 / Gustavo Moser
Issue: 8105 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Arbitration , Artificial intelligence , Technology , EU
printer mail-detail

Making room for AI in arbitration

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
208708
As the EU Artificial Intelligence Act rolls out, Gustavo Moser sets out a practical checklist for managing AI usage in arbitration 
  • The EU AI Act introduces comprehensive compliance standards that will influence international arbitration practices.
  • Establishing robust arbitration agreements and procedural orders will serve as guardrails for arbitral proceedings, effectively communicating the ground rules for managing AI’s role within the arbitration landscape.
  • With penalties for non-compliance set to begin in August 2025, timely adaptation is imperative for maintaining the integrity of the arbitration process.

The EU Artificial Intelligence Act (the ‘AI Act’), which became law on 1 August 2024, established regulations that will reshape the landscape of artificial intelligence (AI) across various sectors, including international arbitration. Most provisions will apply from 2025/26.

As the EU moves forward with implementing this legislation, arbitration stakeholders must navigate its complexities and ensure compliance with the AI Act’s robust standards. While arbitrators may feel the most immediate impact, party counsel must also grasp the implications for their

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sidley—James Inness

Sidley—James Inness

Partner joins capital markets team in London office

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Firm announces appointment of partner as UK general counsel

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Firm appoints first chief marketing officer to drive growth strategy

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: CPR tweak closes third-party disclosure gap
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
NLJ this week: Court of Appeals wrestles with Mazur fallout
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll