Six-Week Process & Enforceability

Yes. Jurisdiction requires a written arbitration agreement made before the dispute, or a post-dispute submission agreement. Filing a claim by itself does not bind a respondent who has not agreed in writing.

No. The Rules require the Tribunal and Platform to use best efforts to issue the award within six weeks from constitution of the Tribunal. The Tribunal may extend the timetable where fairness or the circumstances of the dispute require it.

A failure to submit the initial response does not automatically prevent the arbitration from proceeding. The Tribunal must nevertheless be satisfied as to jurisdiction, effective notice and procedural fairness before determining the dispute.

No. The Tribunal may decide a suitable case on documents alone, hold a focused virtual hearing, or adopt another proportionate procedure. An in-person hearing is contemplated only in exceptional circumstances.

The process is primarily online through the case dashboard, with controlled access, secure document exchange, written submissions, procedural directions and scheduling tools.

The Tribunal may determine its own jurisdiction, including objections concerning the existence, validity, scope or applicability of the arbitration agreement.

The default is a sole arbitrator unless the parties agree otherwise. A three-member tribunal may be used where agreed, where the amount in dispute exceeds the threshold stated in the Rules, or where unusual complexity makes it appropriate.

Arbitrators must be independent and impartial. The Rules provide a disclosure and challenge process where circumstances give rise to justifiable doubts.

The Tribunal may manage technical evidence proportionately and may appoint experts or obtain technical assistance in accordance with the Rules. Parties may also present relevant expert evidence subject to procedural directions.

The parties may choose the seat and governing law in their arbitration clause or submission agreement. Failing agreement, the Rules provide Geneva, Switzerland as the default seat and authorize the Tribunal to determine the applicable law or rules of law as appropriate.

Under the Rules, the award is final and binding on the parties. A limited correction or interpretation mechanism is available under Article 20.

Awards are intended to be capable of recognition and enforcement under applicable arbitration law and, where relevant, the 1958 New York Convention. Recognition and enforcement remain subject to the law of the enforcing court and the defenses available there.

No. No arbitral institution can guarantee enforcement in every jurisdiction or factual circumstance. Enforceability can depend on a valid arbitration agreement, proper notice, due process, the legal seat, the form of the award, public policy and local law.

The seat connects the arbitration to a national arbitration law and a supervisory court. It can affect procedural questions, challenges to the award and the enforcement analysis, even when every hearing and filing occurs online.

Yes. Courts may be asked to grant interim relief, supervise matters permitted by the law of the seat, or recognize and enforce an award. Court involvement does not by itself replace the Tribunal's authority over the merits.

Not by itself. A successful mediation ordinarily produces a settlement agreement. Depending on the circumstances and applicable law, the parties may document settlement in a form intended to facilitate enforcement, including where the Singapore Convention on Mediation applies.