Technology and data

Technology and data

This overview provides a guide to the Technology and Data subtopic within the Arbitration content with links to appropriate materials.

Technology in arbitration

This Practice Note gives an overview of considerations in the use of technology at all stages of an arbitration, before proceedings commence, during proceedings, use in hearings, post-hearing considerations including enforcement and commentary on general technical issues that arise when considering the use of technology in arbitration proceedings.

See Practice Note: Technology in Arbitration.

Remote hearings in international arbitration—a practical guide

This Practice Note provides a comprehensive practical guide to conducting remote hearings in international arbitration. The Practice Note provides a broad overview of this highly practical topic, including sections on: considering the options for remote hearings (fully remote, partially remote, hybrid); potential benefits and concerns when conducting hearings remotely (advantages and disadvantages, pros and cons); potential legal issues related to remote hearings such as the arbitral tribunal’s power (jurisdiction, authority) to order a remote hearing without a party or all parties’ consent; and, all key aspects of planning and conducting remote hearings, including discussion of the technology required.

See ...

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Arbitration News

Indian Supreme Court rules on the pre-requisites for an arbitral tribunal to exercise jurisdict...

Arbitration analysis: The Indian Supreme Court (Supreme Court) has held that an arbitral tribunal can allow joinder of a party to the arbitration even if: (a) the notice of arbitration was not served on such a party, and (b) the party was not impleaded in the court proceedings where the court appointed the arbitral tribunal. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle that only an arbitral tribunal is entitled to rule on its jurisdiction over a party under section 16 of the (Indian) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) and an application for joinder of such party. An arbitral tribunal is required to decide the said issues by examining whether the non-signatory consented to the arbitration agreement. Written by Shruti Dhonde (member), Adimesh Lochan (member) and Vyapak Desai (head) of the International Dispute Resolution and Investigations Practice at Nishith Desai Associates.

Limiting the scope of Achmea? Swedish Supreme Court finds non-EU investor untainted by intra-EU...

Arbitration analysis: The Swedish Supreme Court has upheld part of an arbitral award in an investor-state arbitration which contained intra-EU elements. This new ruling sheds further light on the practical possibility to use investor-state arbitration in the EU, in the post-Achmea era. The Supreme Court overturned the full annulment of the arbitral award ordered by the Svea Court of Appeal, declaring only a partial annulment. In doing so, the Supreme Court held that, despite being part of the very same investment and the same arbitral proceedings, the claims made by the non-EU investor (a Swiss investor) were sufficiently distinguishable from those of the four EU investors. Thus, the court found that ordre public did not require that the entire arbitral award be annulled, and therefore the court allowed the award to stand against the Swiss investor. It follows that, for arbitrations seated in Sweden, non-EU investors may under certain circumstances still rely on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) arbitration against EU member states, even in situations when the disputed investment also involved co-investors from the EU. Written by James Hope, partner, Nils Ivars, senior associate, Martin Hammarskiöld, associate at Vinge, Stockholm, Sweden.

ISTAC and PCA renew cooperation agreement for international arbitration proceedings

The Istanbul Arbitration Centre (ISTAC) and the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) have renewed their cooperation agreement. The agreement enables parties to conduct hearings under either institution's rules at both organisations' headquarters in Istanbul and The Hague. The renewal was marked by a roundtable discussion on 18 June 2025 in Istanbul, focusing on emerging trends in international arbitration. The agreement covers knowledge exchange, capacity building and arbitration proceedings facilitation between the two institutions.

Arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to construe other contracts (CAFI v GTCS)

Arbitration analysis: In this case, Mr Justice Henshaw upheld challenges brought under section 67 (substantive jurisdiction) and section 68 (serious irregularity) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (the ‘Act’), as well as a related appeal on a point of law under section 69 of the Act. The judgment addresses the scope of an arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction, in particular the circumstances in which a tribunal will be entitled to determine the meaning and effect of a different contract over which it does not otherwise have jurisdiction. Written by Douglas Grant, barrister at 7 King’s Bench Walk.