Extract from Rick Mitchell’s article “AI in Arbitration: Will New Guidelines Shape the Future of Dispute Resolution?”
Should arbitrators be required to disclose their use of AI tools during case preparation or research? Do they need party consent—and what if one side objects? And ultimately, who gets to decide the rules governing AI in arbitration?
The questions reflect the complex ethical, legal, and regulatory challenges confronting the international arbitration community, highlighted during discussions among lawyers, regulators, in-house counsel, and tech experts at Paris Arbitration Week in early April.
Appearing by video link, Kilian Gross, head of the European Commission’s AI Unit, outlined the roll-out of the EU AI Act—the world’s first sweeping regulatory framework for artificial intelligence—saying that high-risk or highly impactful systems, like those used in healthcare and recruitment, will face strict obligations and certification requirements.
Gross noted that the new regulation will have direct implications for lawyers and arbitrators, warning that “AI-driven legal research and dispute resolution tools may, under certain conditions, be considered as high-risk uses and may therefore have to comply with the new framework.”
