Reflections on the use of AI in international arbitration

September 1, 2025

In June 2025, Anna Meyendorff chaired a panel on the topic of LegalTech and IT at the 14th Baltic Arbitration Days in Riga, Latvia. The subject of artificial intelligence (AI) dominated panelist presentations and subsequent discussions. Anna's thoughts on the main takeaways from the discussions are below.

Practitioners are coming up with innovative uses for AI

Panelists described several exciting potential uses for AI, including one AI tool developed to streamline the organization and review of case documents and another developed to predict the likely outcome of cases (for use by potential funders). Audience members were divided, with some saying that they would never use AI in their practice and others saying that the potential benefit to clients is so great that it will soon be considered "malpractice" to avoid the use of AI.

Avoiding extremes, it seems clear that AI, used properly, can increase efficiency and lower cost. Practitioners should stay informed about how their competitors and colleagues are using AI to meet client needs.

AI is a nascent technology and many of its uses carry a high risk

Panelists and audience members recounted numerous examples of AI generating false or biased results, as well as examples of legal practitioners facing repercussions for their undisclosed use of AI. However, many participants remained optimistic that as we learn to interact with AI, it will become more useful and less risky. In the current early adoption phase of AI, it is particularly important for practitioners to share their experiences, both bad and good, so that we identify and adopt good practices more quickly.

Standards for the use of AI in legal and dispute proceedings are in development

Given the professional risks of using AI, regulatory frameworks and standards of use are important. Numerous such frameworks are in the early stages of development-although they are unlikely to be consistent across national borders or between regulatory bodies. Panelists discussed guidelines offered by the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, the International Criminal Court, the Madrid International Arbitration Center (CIAM-CIAR), and the European Union AI Act. International arbitration practitioners must remain informed about the evolution of such regulation as they practice across national and jurisdictional boundaries.