The 2025 QMUL International Arbitration Survey: efficiency, confidentiality and the use of AI as major trends in arbitration

Introduction

The sixth edition of the International Arbitration Survey (available here) organised by the Queen Mary University of London ("QMUL") was recently published. It highlights that international arbitration is still widely used to address cross-border disputes, with London as the preferred seat and the ICC Rules as the most-used arbitral rules. It also reveals the respondents' views on factors affecting the efficiency of arbitration and preferences for maintaining confidentiality in commercial arbitration. Finally, it sheds light on both the motivations for, and concerns about, the increased use of AI in international arbitration.

The survey received 2402 questionnaire responses, with 117 interviews conducted. The respondents principally practice in different parts of the world, with 47% from the Asia-Pacific, 21% from Europe, 10% from North America and smaller percentages from the Middle East, Caribbean/Latin America and Africa.

Each edition of QMUL's survey explores a slightly different set of issues. For example, the 2021 edition (here) explored issues like diversity on arbitral tribunals, use of technology, and sustainability and information security. This latest 2025 edition explores issues including efficiency, confidentiality, and the use of AI in international arbitration.

The key findings of the 2025 survey are discussed below:

1. International arbitration remains popular

International arbitration remains a popular method for resolving cross-border disputes, as the preferred choice for 87% of respondents.

2. London remains the preferred seat

London remains the top choice for seat of arbitration (34%), although it was closely followed by Singapore (31%) and Hong Kong (31%), similar to the results of the 2021 survey.

The preferred seats vary between respondents from different regions, with New York and London featuring more prominently among North America-based respondents (50% and 48% respectively) and Hong Kong and Singapore featuring more prominently for Asia-Pacific respondents (45% and 40% respectively). London and Singapore were the top choices in the Middle East (63% and 43% respectively), with London and Paris being the dominant preferences in Europe (59% and 42%), Africa (60% and 44%) and the Caribbean/ Latin America (48% and 46%).

3. The ICC Rules remain the most-used arbitral rules

Meanwhile, the ICC Rules remain the most commonly used arbitral rules (39%), followed by the HKIAC Rules (25%), SIAC Rules (25%) and LCIA Rules (22%). This reflects the same top three choices as in the 2021 survey.

While there is also some regional variation in which rules are among the most commonly chosen, the ICC Rules were the top choice in all regions, except in the Asia-Pacific where the HKIAC Rules were on top.

4. Expedited procedures and early determination are preferred methods to improve efficiency

In relation to enforcement, the majority of respondents (61%) believe annulled awards should not be enforceable.

According to the respondents, the top three processes that would most improve efficiency are expedited or express arbitration procedures (50%), early determination procedures for manifestly unmeritorious claims or defences (49%), and consolidation or joinder (29%). The top three behaviours that most negatively impact efficiency are counsel focusing on adversarial rather than collaborative approaches (24%), lack of proactive case management by arbitrators (23%), and counsel 'over-lawyering' (22%).

5. Most respondents prefer maintaining confidentiality, especially in commercial arbitration

Confidentiality is a key concern for the respondents, especially for commercial arbitration. 90% of respondents do not favour making hearings public in commercial arbitration, albeit 59% of them support publishing redacted awards in ISDS cases. Respondents also expect environmental and human rights issues to appear more frequently in arbitration cases, in both commercial arbitrations and disputes involving States or state entities.

6. AI has increasingly been used in international arbitration

The vast majority of respondents (90%) expect to use AI for research, data analytics and document review in international arbitration. The main motivations for its use are saving party and counsel time (54%) and cost reduction (44%). However, respondents remain concerned about AI errors and bias (51%), confidentiality risks (47%), lack of experience (44%), and regulatory gaps (38%).

Of particular note is that respondents largely approve of the use of AI by arbitrators to assist in administrative and procedural tasks. By contrast, there was strong resistance to its use in tasks firmly within arbitrators' particular mandate, namely those requiring the exercise of discretion and judgement.

Comment

The 2025 QMUL survey provides helpful insights on recent trends in the preferred seat and arbitral rules in international arbitration. It aligns with HSF's findings published earlier this year, which also shows ICC to be a popular arbitral institution and that parties tend to prefer institutions proximate to their jurisdictions.

Another notable finding is the respondents' concern for efficiency. As reported previously by HSF, in the LCIA context, there has been an increase in applications for early determination and expedited formation of tribunals. The need for efficiency is likely to continue to drive changes in the field.

Meanwhile, the increasing use of AI reflects how arbitration continues to adapt to the changing world. As we reported previously, the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators ("CIArb") has published new guidelines on the use of AI in arbitration, which also highlight the same risks as the QMUL survey, such as potential biases and loss of confidentiality. The use of AI in international arbitration is likely to be an area of continued development in the future.

The authors would like to thank Michael Lam for his contribution to this post.