This article was featured in Jus Mundi‘s 2025 Arbitration Year in Review, an annual publication analyzing arbitration developments across 40+ jurisdictions on 6 continents. This edition brings together young practitioners and senior experts to capture the year’s most significant legislative reforms, enforcement trends, and institutional innovations.
THE AUTHORS:
Belén Thomsen, Attorney and Partner, Enrique Barros y Compañía Abogados
José Tomás Hirsch, Attorney and Associate, Garrigues
María Luisa Petitpas, Economist and Vice President, Econsult Capital
Valentina del Solar, Attorney and Associate, Grupo Vial Abogados
The year 2025 marked a new phase for arbitration in Chile: as international caseloads continued to rise, the country deepened its institutional integration with the Ibero-American community, courts reaffirmed a policy of minimum intervention in arbitrations, and recent investment arbitration developments tested the resilience of Chile’s pro-arbitration framework. This report covers:
- The integration agreement between the Arbitration and Mediation Center of the Santiago Chamber of Commerce(“CAM Santiago”) and the International Arbitration Center – Ibero-American Arbitration Center (“CIAM-CIAR”);
- 2022–2025 statistics confirming the low success rate of challenges to arbitral awards; and
- the latest developments in investment arbitrations against Chile.
International Integration: The CAM Santiago–CIAM-CIAR Alliance in 2025
One of the most noteworthy developments in the field of international arbitration in Chile in 2025 was the consolidation of the partnership between CAM Santiago and CIAM-CIAR.
Through this alliance, both institutions agreed to integrate their arbitral activity with the shared aim of jointly promoting the development of international arbitration and addressing its growing needs, particularly within Spanish-language and Ibero-American markets.
CAM Santiago is Chile’s leading arbitral institution and a benchmark in Latin America. Since its establishment in 1992, it has played a pivotal role in the development and consolidation of institutional arbitrations for both domestic and international proceedings.
CIAM-CIAR is an arbitral institution that administers international proceedings with a strong focus on the Ibero-American region. It was founded in 2020 following the consolidation of the Madrid Court of Arbitration, the Spanish Court of Arbitration, the Civil and Commercial Court of Arbitration, and the Madrid Bar Association.
On April 2, 2025, during the III National Arbitration Meeting hosted by CAM Santiago in Santiago, Chile, both institutions executed a cooperation agreement under which CAM Santiago joined CIAM-CIAR as a member institution with the same standing as its founding organizations. As part of this integration, members of CAM Santiago’s executive team were incorporated into CIAM-CIAR, enabling a joint administration for international cases.
Specifically, CAM Santiago will refer the administration of its international arbitration cases -as defined in Law No. 19.971 on International Commercial Arbitration– to CIAM-CIAR, allowing both institutions to administer a case. This joint administration may be eased given that CAM Santiago’s President, joined CIAM-CIAR’s Presidency as Vice President; CAM Santiago’s Legal Director, joined the institution’s Plenary; and CAM Santiago’s Deputy Director, joined as Deputy Secretary. To this end, CAM Santiago amended its International Arbitration Rules to include a referral clause directing cases arising from contracts executed on or after July 1, 2025, to CIAM-CIAR. Additionally, for international arbitrations arising from contracts signed prior to that date, the parties may also submit their disputes to CIAM-CIAR.
The relationship between the two institutions has now evolved from mere cooperation into genuine integration, encompassing institutional governance to the administration of international arbitration cases. This is an innovative agreement that poses a challenge for the institutions involved, as it requires the integration of distinct and geographically distant yet compatible arbitral cultures. It also creates a significant platform for the entire Ibero-American region and strengthens Spanish-language arbitration by helping to unify practices, customs, and standards.
Ultimately, this is a mutually beneficial agreement for the institutions and for the consolidation of international arbitration in the region. The fact that Chile’s principal arbitral center has joined a leading Ibero-American arbitration initiative as a member is evidence of the consolidation of arbitration in Chile, as well as a strong endorsement and recognition of CAM Santiago, which has expanded institutional arbitration beyond national borders. The challenge, however, will be ensuring that Chile continues to grow as a seat of arbitration and that administering European-seated cases does not hinder that growth or the development of its arbitrators.
Minimal Intervention in Practice: How Chilean Courts Treated Challenges (2022–2025)
Statistics on the rate of upheld challenges to arbitral awards in Chile show a clear picture: challenges are filed but rarely succeed. Data from 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 show that the number of complaints and challenges accepted is very low, which reinforces arbitration as a definitive solution to disputes and provides legal certainty for the parties.
Likewise, the case law of the Chilean superior courts has consistently upheld the principle of minimal intervention of the judiciary in arbitration, a key principle to preserve the autonomy of the arbitration system.
According to CAM Santiago statistics, in 2022, the courts ruled on 63 challenges against CAM awards. The most frequently used mechanism was complaints against arbitrators, of which only one was partially upheld out of 45. Overall, two-thirds of the challenges were rejected; the rest were declared inadmissible, withdrawn, archived, or received no ruling. The message was clear: judicial review operates as an exceptional safeguard, not as a second instance.
The year 2023 confirmed the same trend. According to CAM Santiago statistics, of the 247 awards issued that year, 41.3% were challenged. The courts ruled on 108 challenges, with 77 complaints against arbitrators processed and only six partially accepted. No cassation motions were successful and, on appeal, only one case was partially accepted.
The year 2024 followed—and even deepened—the same trend: 142 of 211 awards were challenged (67.3%), with complaints against arbitrators predominating. Courts ruled on 104 challenges, including complaints against arbitrators, annulment petitions, appeals, and cassation requests. Of the 69 complaints against arbitrators, only three were accepted (4.3%). In addition, the Chilean courts rejected all 5 petitions to annul international awards filed that year.
Between 2024 and 2025, the courts broadened the spectrum to include complaints against arbitrators in CAM and ad hoc arbitrations, as well as those handled by other arbitration institutions. The courts heard 165 complaints, of which 12 were accepted. If we also consider that during this period, 30 additional complaints were declared inadmissible and 14 were withdrawn, the acceptance rate is approximately 5.7%. The very low rate of challenges in 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 does not suggest an absence of control, but rather calibrated control, consistent with its function: to guarantee the regularity of the process without distorting the arbitral decision. In other words, the effectiveness of the award is not a slogan; it is a measurable outcome.
Latest Developments in Investment Arbitration
Chile’s investor–State docket in late 2024–2025 features three milestones: one award, one pending proceeding, and one case suspended for settlement negotiations.
Interconexión Eléctrica S.A. E.S.P. v. Republic of Chile (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/27) — Award (December 13, 2024)
Interconexión Eléctrica S.A. E.S.P. is a Colombian company that invested in Chile through Interchile S.A. and ISA Inversiones Chile SpA (jointly, “ISA”). The entities were created for the construction and commissioning of three high-voltage power transmission lines. During construction, authorities applied several delay penalties and called on the performance bonds provided by the contractor. ISA filed an ICSID claim alleging that Chile violated the obligations of fair and equitable treatment and full protection and security of international investments, as provided in the Chile–Colombia Free Trade Agreement (“FTA”) (2006).
According to the claimants, the social unrest of 2019 constituted an event of force majeure, contributing to delays and damages. ISA claimed US$223 million in damages. On December 13, 2024, the tribunal rendered its award, with a partial dissent by the arbitrator appointed by Chile, ordering Chile to reimburse US$16 million of the delay penalty applied, plus interest, while rejecting the remainder of the US$223 million claim. Considering the outcome of the proceeding, the tribunal ordered the claimants to bear 80% of the proceeding costs.
The Award was subsequently rectified by Decision of 11 March 2025, finding that there had been an arithmetic error in the amount to be reimbursed by the claimant as costs of the proceedings.
ADP International S.A. and Vinci Airports S.A.S. v. Republic of Chile (ICSID Case No. ARB/21/40) — Pending
ADP International S.A. and Vinci Airports S.A.S., the two majority shareholders of Sociedad Concesionaria Nuevo Pudahuel S.A. (“Nuevo Pudahuel”), created in Chile for the expansion and operation of Santiago’s international airport, were awarded a 20-year concession in 2015. The claimants argue that Chile failed to restore the concession’s post-pandemic economic and financial balance by refusing to renegotiate the terms of the concession to mitigate the financial burden caused by COVID-19-related air-traffic restrictions, thereby breaching fair and equitable treatment under the Chile–France Bilateral Investment Treaty (“BIT”) (1992).
In parallel with the ICSID proceedings, Nuevo Pudahuel (the concessionaire) initiated a domestic ad hoc arbitration against the Ministry of Public Works; in its decision of 15 May 2024, the Arbitral Commission dismissed the principal claims but partially upheld a subsidiary claim, finding that the pandemic constituted a supervening event that affected the contractual equilibrium.
NC Telecom AS, NC Telecom II AS, WOM Mobile S.A., and WOM S.A. v. Republic of Chile (ICSID Case No. ARB/24/30) — Provisional Measures Denied; Suspension for Settlement Talks (2025)
Norwegian parent companies NC Telecom AS and NC Telecom II AS, and their Chilean subsidiaries WOM Mobile S.A. and WOM S.A., filed an ICSID claim alleging a breach of the obligation of fair and equitable treatment due to a block imposed by the Chilean government on their efforts to expand the 5G network.
Before the ICSID proceedings were initiated, the Chilean subsidiaries requested, as a provisional measure in local courts, an order preventing Chilean authorities from enforcing a series of performance bonds, arguing that the measure was urgent and necessary to avoid permanent damage, pending the constitution of the arbitral tribunal.
Although the local courts granted WOM’s request for interim relief, the ICSID tribunal rejected a similar request before it in June 2025, allowing Chile to enforce the performance bonds.
The claimants also requested, as a provisional measure,
In September 2025, the parties jointly requested a suspension of the proceedings to negotiate a settlement. The agreement has not yet been officially published by ICSID. According to local press reports, the company will complete the rollout of the 5G network by a new deadline and pay approximately US$53 million to the Chilean government. The proceedings remain suspended to date.
Bupa Investments Overseas Limited v. Republic of Chile (ICSID Case No. ARB/25/50) – Request for Arbitration
In November 2025 the British company Bupa Investments Overseas Limited (“BUPA”) registered a request for arbitration proceedings against Chile. Although the request was declared admissible it has not yet been published at the ICSID Database.
According to local press, “Isapre Cruz Blanca” a health insurance company owned by BUPA, was negatively affected by several judicial and legislative measures adopted by Chile. Specifically, the company asserts that in context of Covid-19 pandemic they were forced to freeze prices, and once the pandemic was over, a law was passed that made these effects permanent and forced them to refund what they had allegedly overcharged.
These developments—the CAM Santiago–CIAM-CIAR integration, minimal court intervention, and an active investor–State caseload—suggest a more predictable and internationally connected Chilean seat, a trajectory that is expected to continue into 2026.
Discover more insights into the latest developments in arbitration in 2025 from around the world now
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Santiago Very Young Arbitration Practitioners (“SVYAP”) is a network that brings together young professionals interested in domestic and international arbitration, promoting both professional and academic engagement. SVYAP hosts academic and social events for its members, creating high-quality intergenerational spaces for networking and development.
The authors of this report are current members of the SVYAP Executive Committee:
Belén Thomsen, Attorney and Partner at Enrique Barros y Compañía Abogados
José Tomás Hirsch, Attorney and Associate at Garrigues
María Luisa Petitpas, Economist and Vice President at Econsult Capital
Valentina del Solar, Attorney and Associate at Grupo Vial Abogados
*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.
