Leon Alexander<\/strong>, Partner at\u00a0Clyde & Co<\/strong><\/a>
Hannah Chua<\/strong><\/a><\/strong>, Legal Director at\u00a0Clyde & Co<\/strong><\/a>
Celest Koh<\/strong>, Trainee Solicitor at\u00a0Clasis LCC<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
Clyde & Co<\/a>\u2019s Young Arbitration Group provides a unique insight into\u00a0international arbitration\u00a0issues through the lens of young international arbitration practitioners working across different jurisdictions. In this series with\u00a0Daily Jus<\/a>, Clyde & Co explores the evolving landscape of artificial intelligence in arbitration<\/strong>, analysing recent developments, legislative changes, and their impact on dispute resolution worldwide.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Singapore<\/a> is a leading hub for international arbitration, and its approach to incorporating artificial intelligence (\u201cAI<\/strong>\u201d) is grounded in thoughtful and responsible adoption of AI tools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n AI tools are increasingly being explored in arbitration for legal research, particularly for their enhanced search capabilities and ability to generate usable case law summaries. These tools can help users quickly grasp the \u201cflavour\u201d of a case, improving research efficiency. In Singapore, LawNet AI Summaries developed by the Infocomm Media Development Authority\u2019s GPT-Legal, offer AI-generated case summaries for unreported judgments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, the use of AI output carries \u201chealth warnings\u201d due to concerns about the technology\u2019s accuracy and reliability, including the risk of hallucination. The Singapore Court Registrar Circulars<\/a> reminds users of the State Courts to continually assess the suitability of generative AI tools for preparing legal documents. It recommends that lawyers and self-represented individuals using generative AI ensure that all information submitted to the court is appropriate, accurate, true, and independently verified. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In arbitration, the CIArb (Chartered Institute of Arbitrators) Guideline on the Use of AI in Arbitration (2025)<\/strong> <\/a>permits the use of AI for legal research but advises arbitrators to treat it as a supportive tool rather than relying on it at the outset, thereby ensuring that independent judgment is preserved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In international arbitration, where it is common to encounter documents in multiple languages, AI tools are already utilised to assist with translation, thereby improving efficiency and reducing costs. For instance, most leading translation companies based in Singapore now offer AI-assisted translation services, where AI programs initially translate documents before being reviewed and verified by a translator. AI may also help harmonise the interpretation of materials across different languages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Apart from the translation of documents, AI tools are also increasingly used in arbitration to generate real-time hearing transcripts more cost-effectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Whilst the technology is still being developed, AI-assisted translation and transcription is clearly a useful way to support the procedural aspects of multilingual arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n AI continues to be used in arbitration to support case management, especially in handling large volumes of documents. In one case administered by the SIAC (Singapore International Arbitration Centre)<\/a>, an AI tool reportedly reviewed over 750,000 documents in just four weeks by identifying similar terms and clauses. Whilst it remains imperative to check for accuracy and any omissions, such AI programmes are useful for at least a first-pass review \u2013 as arbitration practitioners would know, such a task would have taken months to be completed manually. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Arbitrations administered by the SIAC also frequently utilise the SIAC Gateway, its cloud-based case management platform, which offers a secure and integrated interface for filing, communication, and evidence management. These case management capabilities are particularly useful for expedited or document-heavy arbitrations. This commitment to technology is also reflected in the SIAC Arbitration Rules 2025<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n As AI tools are increasingly used in legal processes, there is a growing need for robust governance frameworks to ensure accountability, transparency, and data protection. The protection of confidential information is especially important in arbitration. This is where Singapore\u2019s Personal Data Protection Act<\/a> (\u201cPDPA<\/strong>\u201d) plays a critical role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The PDPA establishes clear rules for how personal data must be collected, used, and disclosed, which is especially relevant when AI systems process large volumes of confidential and commercially sensitive information during arbitration proceedings. Ensuring compliance with the PDPA helps mitigate risks such as data breaches and over-reliance on automated outputs. In this context, the PDPA not only supports ethical AI deployment but also strengthens public trust in Singapore\u2019s AI-enhanced arbitration landscape.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rule 61 of the 2025 SIAC Arbitration Rules<\/a> promotes a balanced approach to data protection by encouraging parties and tribunals to proactively discuss and agree on suitable information security protocols\u2014including cybersecurity and cyber resilience\u2014either during the initial case management conference or at any other appropriate stage of the arbitration. This provision reflects the increasing significance of safeguarding digital information in light of the growing reliance on technology throughout arbitral proceedings. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Building on the importance of responsible AI use in Singapore\u2019s arbitration and legal landscape, the Singapore Courts have developed a Guide on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools by Court Users<\/a>, effective from October 2024. This Guide provides crucial governance principles to ensure AI is used ethically and transparently in court proceedings, and these principles are likely to be similarly applicable to arbitration hearings. For instance, the Guide makes clear that users are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the contents of the documents submitted are accurate, relevant and do not infringe intellectual property rights. Further, it is unacceptable to use Generative AI tools to fabricate evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is clear that AI offers valuable support in arbitration by enhancing efficiency, document handling, and research. However, while harnessing the benefits of AI, one should be aware of the risks associated with its use, and human supervision remains essential.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Singapore\u2019s legal and arbitration sectors are therefore taking a measured and practical approach in adopting AI tools to support, rather than replace, human expertise, while maintaining a strong focus on procedural fairness and integrity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ABOUT THE AUTHORS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Leon Alexander<\/strong> is a partner in the Singapore office of Clyde & Co<\/strong><\/a>. His practice focuses on advising commodities and energy multinational corporations. Leon has significant experience of multi-jurisdictional dispute resolution and handles claims both in court and arbitration proceedings including SIAC<\/a>, ICC<\/a>, LCIA<\/a>, GAFTA, FOSFA<\/a>, LMAA<\/a> and SCMA<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hannah Chua<\/strong><\/a> is a Legal Director in the Singapore Energy, Marine and Natural Resources team at Clyde & Co<\/strong><\/a>. She regularly acts for and advises clients in the energy and maritime industry, including leading commodity trading firms, mining companies, multinational energy corporations, shipowners and charterers. Her disputes experience encompasses proceedings in the Singapore courts as well as international arbitration (e.g.<\/em> SIAC<\/a>, SCMA<\/a>, LCIA<\/a>, LMAA<\/a>, ICC<\/a> and ad-hoc arbitrations). In recent years, Hannah has also been closely involved in projects involving clean and renewable energy, including LNG, biofuel and ammonia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Celest Koh<\/strong>\u00a0is a trainee solicitor in the Energy, Marine and Natural Resources team at\u00a0Clasis LCC<\/strong><\/strong>, based in Singapore.<\/p>\n\n\n\n *The views and opinions expressed by authors are theirs and do not necessarily reflect those of their organizations, employers, or Daily Jus, Jus Mundi, or Jus Connect.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Singapore leads in AI-driven arbitration: exploring legal research, translation, case management, and governance to enhance fairness and efficiency.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":288943,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":{"subtitle":"","format":"standard","video":"","gallery":"","source_name":"","source_url":"","via_name":"","via_url":"","override_template":"0","override":[{"template":"custom","single_blog_custom":"274736","parallax":"1","fullscreen":"1","layout":"right-sidebar","sidebar":"author","second_sidebar":"default-sidebar","sticky_sidebar":"1","share_position":"hide","share_float_style":"share-monocrhome","show_share_counter":"0","show_view_counter":"0","show_featured":"1","show_post_meta":"1","show_post_author":"0","show_post_author_image":"0","show_post_date":"1","post_date_format":"default","post_date_format_custom":"Y\/m\/d","show_post_category":"0","show_post_reading_time":"0","post_reading_time_wpm":"300","show_zoom_button":"0","zoom_button_out_step":"2","zoom_button_in_step":"3","show_post_tag":"0","show_prev_next_post":"0","show_popup_post":"0","number_popup_post":"1","show_author_box":"0","show_post_related":"0","show_inline_post_related":"0"}],"override_image_size":"0","image_override":[{"single_post_thumbnail_size":"crop-500","single_post_gallery_size":"crop-500"}],"trending_post":"0","trending_post_position":"meta","trending_post_label":"Trending","sponsored_post":"0","sponsored_post_label":"Sponsored by","sponsored_post_name":"","sponsored_post_url":"","sponsored_post_logo_enable":"0","sponsored_post_logo":"","sponsored_post_desc":"","disable_ad":"0"},"jnews_primary_category":{"id":"171","hide":""},"jnews_social_meta":{"fb_title":"AI and Arbitration Series: A Perspective from Singapore","fb_description":"Singapore leads in AI-driven arbitration: exploring legal research, translation, case management, and governance to enhance fairness and efficiency.","fb_image":"288945","twitter_title":"AI and Arbitration Series: A Perspective from Singapore","twitter_description":"Singapore leads in AI-driven arbitration: exploring legal research, translation, case management, and governance to enhance fairness and efficiency.","twitter_image":"288945"},"jnews_review":[],"enable_review":"0","type":"percentage","name":"","summary":"","brand":"","sku":"","good":[{"good_text":""}],"bad":[{"bad_text":""}],"score_override":"0","override_value":"","rating":[{"rating_text":"","rating_number":"10"}],"price":[{"shop":"","price":"","link":"","icon":""}],"jnews_override_counter":{"override_view_counter":"0","view_counter_number":"0","override_share_counter":"0","share_counter_number":"0","override_like_counter":"0","like_counter_number":"0","override_dislike_counter":"0","dislike_counter_number":"0"},"footnotes":""},"categories":[205,170,249,207,208,188,146,171,161,247],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-287360","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-arbitration","category-asia-pacific","category-clyde-co","category-commercial-arbitration","category-investor-state-arbitration","category-legal-insights","category-legal-tech","category-singapore","category-world","category-worldwide-perspectives"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/287360","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=287360"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/287360\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":287401,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/287360\/revisions\/287401"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/288943"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=287360"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=287360"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=287360"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=287360"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Introduction<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Legal Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Translation & Transcription<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Case Management \/ Document Review<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
AI Governance in Singapore<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Conclusion<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/2024-09-Clyde-and-co-1024x337.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n