On June 10, 2025 I was very fortunate to attend the AAA/ICDR’s second Future DR conference at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands (the first happened at Stanford Law School last September). This meeting convened global leaders in arbitration, mediation and legal tech for a full-day forum that focused on how AI and emerging technologies are transforming the future of dispute resolution.
For the first panel my friend Sophie Nappert hosted a spirited debate between two teams that considered this contention:
“In compliance with its duty to conduct the arbitration in an efficient and cost-effective manner, the Tribunal shall use AI for all tasks other than the core tasks of an arbitrator.”
The audience voted digitally before and after the debate to see how opinions changed, but the debaters did such a good job the room was evenly divided both before and after the discussion (I voted in favor). Concerns were expressed about the survival of the human arbitration field once AI crosses the quality and accuracy frontier, but the overall conclusion was that attempts to restrain AI (or to heavily regulate its expansion) are likely doomed to failure.
The second panel, hosted by lawyer and arbitrator Kathleen Paisley, discussed procedural integrity in international dispute resolution, exploring how AI can enhance fairness, maintain compliance with existing standards, and uphold trust in the dispute resolution process. Panelists Nino Sievi and Stan Putter discussed the practicality of being compliant with EU standards in the face of rapidly changing technology, especially when commonly used technologies like email are already in violation of data protection requirements. Some panelists suggested that charging for fifteen hours of document review by an associate (which could be done by an AI in 10 minutes) may be unethical without getting prior approval from the client for doing the work the old way.
The keynote speaker, Dr. Hab. Marcin Czepelak, Secretary-General of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), talked about the adaptability of dispute resolution organizations, and how that adaptability will be a defining characteristic in the age of AI. He made a comparison to the COVID-19 response, where ADR organizations moved online much more quickly than traditional courts. In a world where technology straddles borders but legal frameworks do not, he suggested that international dispute resolution (IDR) may be a better fit for delivering justice in an AI transformed world.
In the afternoon AAA’s own Eric Tuchmann hosted a discussion between corporate counsel from Germany, France, Switzerland, and Lithuania about how AI can re-engineer the dispute resolution process to drive business outcomes. AI is changing the equations of companies around what they’re willing to pay for arbitration and mediation, and this session shared their perspective on what they expect from dispute resolution providers. Microsoft even established an Office of Responsible AI within their legal team that created a centralized framework for how AI can and should be used, and it is likely that any dispute resolution service would be expected to abide by the same standards Microsoft requires their internal employees to follow.
In the afternoon I joined two panels – one on “The Dynamic Relationship Between International Mediation and Arbitration” and another focused on getting comfortable with AI-driven decision making. We discussed recent trends in international mediation and arbitration, the rise of AI, and my friend David Evans (lawyer with Murphy & King, in Boston) gave a great presentation on AI tools that can show their work (for more, check out his great article in Dispute Resolution Journal). I made the point, echoing Secretary General Czepelak, that dispute resolution was more flexible than litigation, and therefore better positioned to leverage AI over the long run. I also shared Richard Susskind’s framework around “automation / innovation / elimination” and urged the audience to think about how each of those concepts might guide the future development of ADR.
The conference was attended by several of my good friends from Mediators Beyond Borders, who held a small celebration the day after the conference to launch MBB-Europe, the European entity of Mediators Beyond Borders International. Their aim is to connect community mediation organizations across Europe to promote knowledge sharing and best practices, and to amplify the essential work being done by community mediators to promote social and community cohesion across European towns and cities. You can learn more about MBB-Europe here.
Also on the day after FutureDR.org the AAA hosted (in partnership with Wolters Kluwer) a one day hackathon exploring the latest legal AI tools, applying them to various ADR challenges.
Overall it was an extremely inspiring meeting, one that took place literally in the shadow of the Peace Palace. I can’t imagine a more perfect location to strategize about the future of ADR. The big takeaway for court ODR is that AI is here to stay, and integrating it into court operations will soon be mandatory, not optional. Kudos to the organizers for a job well done, and I can’t wait for the next meeting, which is currently planned for the fall at Cardozo Law School in New York City.
High profile Californian mediators Jeff Krivis and Mariam Zadeh have given their First Mediation website a makeover here to celebrate opening in the Carmel/Monterey area in addition to their L.A....
By Geoff SharpIn this article, I want to share a story about a family business conflict. This is not based on any real family business, but is so common, it could be....
By Douglas NollI welcome renowned ADR experts that built up the world's leading mediation website and organization- Mediate.com, to the Expert Views ADR (EVA) Vid/ Podcast Show. SEE THE VIDEO: https://youtu.be/8ErbBihKoeg Professor...
By Clare Fowler, Colin Rule
