Cross-border disputes are a reality of international business as global trade and digital connectivity expand. Disputes between investors and states or joint venture partners require mechanisms that offer neutrality and enforceability.
International arbitration has emerged as a leading method for resolving conflicts, offering parties a neutral forum that transcends national courts and legal systems.
The Rise of Institutional & Treaty-Based Dispute Mechanisms
More global business contracts now embed international arbitration clauses rather than relying solely on local courts, giving both parties a neutral forum to resolve conflicts across borders. ICSID and frameworks under UNCITRAL have become standard features of commercial and treaty-based disputes. Investor–state arbitration, for instance, provides recourse for foreign investors when they face unfair treatment or regulatory interference abroad.
Gottlieb’s 2025 update on arbitration identified several shifts reshaping the field, including the use of AI tools in case management and third-party funding for claimants seeking capital efficiency. It also highlighted the rise of sustainability and ESG-related disputes.
The UK, long regarded as a hub for dispute resolution, is modernising its own framework. The new Arbitration Act 2025 is designed to strengthen London’s position as a preferred venue for international arbitration, ensuring its rules remain aligned with global best practices. The updated Act introduces measures to improve procedural transparency and speed.
Enforcement & the Role of Emerging Treaties
Securing a favourable judgment or arbitral award is often just as important as ensuring it’s enforceable across borders, which can be just as challenging. Businesses now assess where to bring a dispute, and where enforcement will matter most; typically in jurisdictions where a counterparty’s assets are located.
To improve certainty, the UK recently adopted the 2019 Hague Judgments Convention (Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments). The treaty aims to simplify the cross-border enforcement of civil and commercial judgments, reducing duplication and conflicting rulings.
The UK has also joined broader multilateral efforts to preserve fair dispute processes in global trade. In June 2025, it became part of the WTO’s Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration (MPIA) arrangement. The mechanism provides an alternative route for trade dispute appeals while the WTO’s traditional system remains paralysed.
Litigation Risks and Jurisdictional Arbitrage
Choosing where and how to litigate has become a strategic business decision in the modern era of legal pluralism. Companies increasingly negotiate choice-of-court clauses and forum selection agreements that favour jurisdictions known for stability and strong enforcement.
Cross-border litigation still poses challenges, including serving documents internationally and navigating differing procedural rules. The potential for “forum shopping,” where one party seeks the most advantageous legal system, remains a concern.
Strategic Adaptations in Contracting, Risk Management & Dispute Readiness
Modern agreements are more likely to include multi-tiered dispute resolution clauses that combine mediation and arbitration to encourage early settlement. Many firms are also developing dispute resolution playbooks that outline escalation procedures and response protocols when conflicts arise.
The integration of ESG-related claims and post-award modifications is redefining the concept of being “dispute ready.” The London Court of International Arbitration continues to see rising caseloads, reflecting global confidence in its neutrality and expertise.
