A focused dispute-resolution forum for commercial technology relationships, where the technical record matters as much as the contract. Explore eight focused areas below.
01 — Software delivery
Software development, implementation and acceptance disputes
For disputes between customers, developers, agencies, integrators and technology suppliers involving delivery, quality, scope or project breakdown.
Common disputes
Missed milestones, delays and abandoned projects
Non-conforming functionality or failed acceptance tests
Scope change, change-control and payment disputes
Defects, performance, security and integration failures
Termination, handover and source-code access
Evidence that commonly matters
Master services agreements and statements of work
Specifications, tickets, repositories and release records
Acceptance criteria and testing results
Change requests, project communications and invoices
Expert or technical evidence where proportionate
Why specialist adjudication helps
A proportionate process can distinguish a contractual defect from an evolving specification, evaluate delivery and acceptance records, and focus the parties on the technical and commercial issues that determine responsibility.
For commercial disputes between SaaS providers, enterprise customers, resellers and implementation partners operating through recurring and often cross-border services.
Common disputes
Availability, uptime and service-credit claims
Implementation failures and delayed go-live
Renewal, cancellation and minimum-term disputes
Usage charges, pricing changes and unpaid fees
Data export, migration, suspension and termination
Evidence that commonly matters
Subscription agreements, orders and SLAs
Status records, incident reports and support tickets
Usage, billing and account-administration records
Implementation plans and acceptance records
Renewal, cancellation and notice communications
Why specialist adjudication helps
The Tribunal can focus on how the agreement allocates availability, security, implementation, support, payment and transition obligations—without treating a recurring cloud service as a conventional one-time delivery.
For confidential disputes over software, code, data, brands and other technology rights, where contractual scope, technical use and commercial control overlap.
Common disputes
Ownership of custom-developed software or source code
Scope, territory and duration of licence rights
Unauthorized use, sublicensing or distribution
Royalty reporting, audits and unpaid licence fees
Termination, continued use and transition obligations
Evidence that commonly matters
Licence, development and assignment agreements
Repository history, contribution and authorship records
Product, deployment and access records
Royalty statements, audit materials and invoices
Termination notices and post-termination conduct
Why specialist adjudication helps
The Tribunal can assess contractual rights alongside the technical record: what was created, by whom, how it was used, which rights were granted and whether the disputed activity remained within scope.
AI systems, data use and automated-decision disputes
For disputes involving training data, model performance, governance, confidentiality, regulatory allocation and the commercial use of AI-enabled systems.
Common disputes
Model accuracy, performance and implementation claims
Training-data rights, provenance and permitted use
Confidential information and data-governance failures
Bias, explainability and contractual compliance
Allocation of regulatory and operational responsibility
Evidence that commonly matters
AI supply agreements, model cards and specifications
Training, validation and evaluation records
Data licences, governance policies and audit trails
Prompts, outputs, logs and human-review procedures
Risk assessments and change-management records
Why specialist adjudication helps
The Tribunal can connect contractual promises with the technical lifecycle of a model, distinguish design limitations from implementation failures, and evaluate data rights and governance evidence proportionately.
Blockchain, smart-contract and digital-asset disputes
For commercial disputes arising from blockchain infrastructure, tokenized projects, custody, protocols and smart-contract performance.
Common disputes
Smart-contract defects and unintended execution
Token allocation, vesting and project-delivery claims
Custody, access-control and wallet-management failures
Protocol, exchange and platform service disputes
Governance, licensing and contributor disagreements
Evidence that commonly matters
On-chain records and verified transaction histories
Source code, audits and deployment records
Token, custody and platform agreements
Governance proposals and technical communications
Access, security and incident-response records
Why specialist adjudication helps
A specialist process can interpret on-chain conduct alongside off-chain agreements, address technically complex evidence and determine contractual responsibility without assuming that code alone resolves the legal dispute.
Technology procurement, integration and transformation disputes
For disputes involving enterprise systems, cloud migrations, implementation partners, managed services and complex multi-supplier programmes.
Common disputes
Failed implementations and delayed go-live
Integration, migration and interoperability failures
Scope, governance and change-control breakdowns
Performance, security and service-level claims
Exit assistance, handover and supplier dependency
Evidence that commonly matters
Procurement documents, proposals and solution designs
Implementation plans, RAID logs and governance records
Testing, migration and acceptance evidence
Change requests, dependencies and supplier communications
Service reports, invoices and remediation plans
Why specialist adjudication helps
The Tribunal can examine shared dependencies across customers, prime contractors and subcontractors, distinguish programme governance failures from technical defects, and focus relief on the commercial outcome.
For platform-based and other startups facing disputes across their internal governance and external commercial relationships—with founders, co-founders, employees, contractors, business users, enterprise customers, commercial platform participants, service providers, investors, accelerators and incubators.
Common disputes
Founder and co-founder deadlock, departures, duties and decision-making authority
Vesting, dilution, option pools, sweat equity and promised ownership
Employee and contractor claims involving pay, incentives, confidentiality and IP assignment
Business-user and enterprise-customer disputes over access, platform transactions and service performance
Disagreements with vendors, cloud providers, advisers, accelerators and incubators
Investor rights, reporting obligations, funding milestones and operational control
Evidence that commonly matters
Founders’ and shareholders’ agreements, cap tables and vesting schedules
Employment, consultancy, incentive and IP-assignment documents
Terms of use, customer contracts, support records and transaction histories
Board minutes, written consents and internal decision records
Investor updates, milestone reports and platform or product data
Why specialist adjudication helps
Startup disputes often combine governance, employment, technology, financing and customer issues. A specialist Tribunal can separate those overlapping relationships, identify the controlling agreements and preserve commercial continuity while addressing urgent questions of ownership, access, control and accountability.
Financing, investment, lending and equity disputes
For commercial financing disputes materially connected to technology and innovation ventures, involving founders, shareholders, angel investors, venture-capital funds, lenders, banks, accelerators, incubators and other financing participants—from early-stage funding through repayment, conversion, dilution and exit.
Common disputes
Equity subscriptions, shareholder rights and incomplete investment rounds
Convertible notes, SAFEs, warrants and disputed conversion mechanics
Valuation, dilution, anti-dilution, preference and option disputes
Loan drawdown, interest, repayment, default, covenant and acceleration claims
Security, guarantees, priority and enforcement disagreements
Misrepresentation, disclosure, use-of-funds and funding-milestone claims
Information, consent, governance and exit rights of investors or lenders
Evidence that commonly matters
Term sheets, subscription documents and shareholders’ agreements
Loan, convertible, security, guarantee and intercreditor instruments
Cap tables, statutory registers, board approvals and closing records
Financial statements, bank records, forecasts and use-of-funds evidence
Valuation models, milestone certificates, notices, waivers and investor communications
Why specialist adjudication helps
A focused process can interpret interconnected corporate and financing instruments, trace changes in capitalization and payment obligations, and determine how valuation, conversion, security and governance provisions operate in the parties’ actual commercial relationship. This sector does not extend to consumer banking or regulatory enforcement claims.
The process is available where the parties have a written arbitration agreement, or enter into a post-dispute agreement to arbitrate. Depending on the agreement, applicable law and relief claimed, a Tribunal may consider payment, damages, declarations, contractual interpretation, allocation of costs and other remedies within its jurisdiction. No outcome is predetermined.
A-Resolve