JudgeAI AI Arbitration Rules
Revised Draft: 27 May 2026 These Rules are intended to replace and modernize the JudgeAI Arbitration Rules effective 20 October 2024. They are drafted for the current JudgeAI data room procedure and are designed to operate as a record-based electronic arbitration framework. Implementation note: these Rules distinguish between (i) functions currently automated in the JudgeAI platform, including data room creation, respondent invitation, document filing, sequential post-Answer timetable, applicable-law assessment, record closure, AI decision workflow, and draft award generation; and (ii) procedural rights or powers that may require platform configuration, manual administration, party agreement, or later product implementation.Article 1. Scope and Application
1.1. These Rules govern arbitration proceedings conducted through the JudgeAI platform where the parties have agreed in writing that disputes shall be resolved by arbitration using JudgeAI, the JudgeAI platform, or a substantially equivalent AI arbitration mechanism.
1.2. These Rules govern the procedure of the arbitration. The merits of the dispute shall be decided under the applicable law or rules of law determined under Article 11.
1.3. If the parties' arbitration agreement conflicts with these Rules, the arbitration agreement shall prevail to the extent permitted by mandatory law and by the law of the arbitral seat.
1.4. If these Rules are silent on a procedural issue, JudgeAI shall conduct the arbitration in the manner it considers appropriate, provided that each party is treated fairly and is given a reasonable opportunity to present its case.
1.5. These Rules are suitable for commercial, civil, contractual, property, technology, services, debt, and other private disputes unless mandatory law, the arbitration agreement, or the subject matter of the dispute prevents their use.
Article 2. Definitions
2.1. "JudgeAI" means the electronic arbitration platform, data room, AI decision workflow, and related procedural tools used to administer and analyze the case record.
2.2. "Tribunal" means the decision-making function designated by the parties' arbitration agreement. Where the arbitration agreement permits an AI-based tribunal or automated determination, the Tribunal may consist of the JudgeAI AI decision workflow. Where applicable law requires a natural person arbitrator, the JudgeAI output may operate as a draft award, recommendation, or decision-support report for the appointed arbitrator.
2.3. "Data Room" means the electronic case file in which the parties submit pleadings, evidence, procedural submissions, notices, and communications.
2.4. "Request" or "Statement of Claim" means the Claimant's initial filing commencing the arbitration.
2.5. "Answer" or "Response" means the Respondent's filing answering the Request and presenting defences, objections, counterclaims, set-off, and supporting evidence.
2.6. "Reply" means the Claimant's post-Answer submission responding to the Answer.
2.7. "Rejoinder" means the Respondent's submission responding to the Reply.
2.8. "Record" means all pleadings, evidence, procedural materials, metadata, and platform-generated procedural entries admitted into the Data Room before closure of the record.
2.9. "Award" means the reasoned final determination generated or issued in accordance with these Rules, subject to the legal status assigned to it by the arbitration agreement and applicable law.
Article 3. Arbitration Agreement and Legal Status
3.1. The parties' agreement to arbitrate through JudgeAI shall be in writing. It may be contained in a contract, a separate arbitration agreement, an online submission agreement, or any electronic record sufficient under applicable law.
3.2. The arbitration agreement should identify, where possible:
a. the parties;
b. the disputes covered by the agreement;
c. the use of JudgeAI or the JudgeAI platform;
d. the seat or legal place of arbitration;
e. the language of the arbitration;
f. the rules of law applicable to the merits;
g. whether the JudgeAI output is intended to be a binding arbitral award, a draft award for a human arbitrator, a settlement evaluation, or another form of ADR determination.
3.3. If the legal system applicable to the arbitration does not permit an AI system to act as an arbitrator, the JudgeAI determination shall be treated, to the maximum extent permitted, as a draft award, reasoned recommendation, expert determination, settlement evaluation, or decision-support artifact for a duly appointed arbitrator or decision-maker.
3.4. Nothing in these Rules limits mandatory rights of the parties under the law of the seat, the law governing the arbitration agreement, or any law applicable to recognition, enforcement, or challenge of an award.
Article 4. Core Procedural Principles
4.1. The proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with:
a. equality of the parties;
b. reasonable opportunity to present the case;
c. procedural transparency within the Data Room;
d. record-based decision-making;
e. reasoned determinations;
f. confidentiality;
g. efficiency and proportionality.
4.2. JudgeAI shall not decide on facts, claims, defences, documents, or legal theories that are not contained in the Record, except that it may identify missing or unresolved matters and draw procedural or evidentiary consequences as permitted by these Rules.
4.3. A party's failure to participate does not by itself constitute an admission of the opposing party's allegations. JudgeAI may continue the proceedings and draw appropriate evidentiary conclusions from the Record.
Article 5. Electronic Data Room and Communications
5.1. All proceedings shall be conducted electronically through the JudgeAI Data Room unless the arbitration agreement or mandatory law requires otherwise.
5.2. The Data Room shall contain or display, where filed, generated, or available in the current platform version:
a. the Request;
b. notice to the Respondent;
c. the Answer;
d. any Reply and Rejoinder;
e. evidence and exhibits;
f. procedural status and timetable entries;
g. applicable law assessment;
h. platform-generated metadata, logs, or audit entries where exposed by the platform;
i. the final Award or draft Award.
5.3. Communications, notices, and procedural updates sent through the platform, by registered platform email, or by another agreed electronic method are deemed electronic communications for purposes of these Rules.
5.4. Access to the Data Room is currently tied to the Claimant account and the invited Respondent account. Access for representatives, counsel, experts, and other authorized persons may be supported by platform configuration or later product functionality. Each user must authenticate using the secure access method required by JudgeAI.
Article 6. Commencement of Arbitration
6.1. Arbitration is commenced when the Claimant submits a Request through the JudgeAI platform.
6.2. The Request should include:
a. names and contact details of the parties;
b. a concise statement of the dispute;
c. facts supporting the claim;
d. relief or remedy sought;
e. legal grounds or arguments, if known;
f. the contract or legal instrument giving rise to the dispute, if any;
g. the arbitration agreement or clause, if available;
h. the governing law, seat, and language, if alleged or agreed;
i. supporting evidence.
6.3. The Claimant should submit all evidence on which it relies with the Request, unless the evidence is unavailable or the procedural timetable permits later submission.
6.4. The platform may reject a Request that does not include a required claim document or cannot be processed. Other deficiencies may be flagged in the Data Room, the preflight checks, or the decision workflow.
Article 7. Notice to Respondent and Access
7.1. Upon filing of the Request, JudgeAI shall create a Data Room and send notice to the Respondent using the email address or contact method supplied by the Claimant.
7.2. The notice shall include, where available:
a. the case title;
b. the case identifier;
c. the identity of the Claimant;
d. the invited Respondent email or contact;
e. a secure link to the Data Room;
f. the next procedural step;
g. the deadline for the Answer, if fixed.
7.3. The Respondent must access the Data Room using the invited account or another account approved by JudgeAI.
7.4. If a Respondent contends that notice was defective or that access was not possible, it shall raise the issue promptly through the platform.
Article 8. Answer, Defences, Counterclaims, and Objections
8.1. The Respondent shall submit an Answer through the platform. The current platform requires the Answer before the case can proceed to the post-Answer timetable or AI review. A fixed Answer deadline may be stated in the notice, arbitration agreement, or a later platform configuration; it is not currently auto-enforced by the Data Room unless configured.
8.2. The Answer should include:
a. admission or denial of each material claim;
b. factual and legal defences;
c. jurisdictional objections;
d. objections to applicable law, seat, language, or procedure;
e. counterclaims, set-off, or cross-claims, if any;
f. requested outcome;
g. supporting evidence.
8.3. Jurisdictional objections should be raised no later than the Answer, unless JudgeAI determines that later submission is justified.
8.4. Counterclaims or set-off may be included in the Answer text and supporting documents. The current platform does not yet provide a separate structured counterclaim module. Such matters are considered from the filed record if they fall within the arbitration agreement and can be determined without unfair prejudice to the other party.
Article 9. Case Definition and Procedural Order
9.1. After the Answer is filed, JudgeAI shall define the procedural state of the case and issue or generate a procedural timetable.
9.2. The current Data Room displays a case definition through case metadata, party identity, procedural stage, timetable, applicable-law assessment, documents, submissions, and workflow status. A separate formal Terms of Reference document is not currently generated automatically. Where appropriate, the case definition may identify:
a. the parties;
b. the claims and relief sought;
c. the defences and objections;
d. counterclaims or set-off;
e. issues for determination;
f. alleged seat, language, and applicable law;
g. the procedural timetable;
h. any unresolved procedural issue.
9.3. The case definition is based on the Record and may be revised if permitted by these Rules or required by due process.
Article 10. Procedural Timetable
10.1. After the Answer is filed, JudgeAI shall establish a sequential procedural timetable for any further written exchange.
10.2. Unless otherwise ordered or configured, the default platform timetable is:
a. Claimant Reply and supporting evidence: 14 calendar days after the Answer or procedural timetable is issued;
b. Respondent Rejoinder and supporting evidence: 14 calendar days after the Claimant Reply deadline;
c. closure of the Record: upon expiry of the Respondent Rejoinder period.
10.2A. In the current platform configuration, additional evidence is permitted only within the filing party's own window: the Claimant's additional evidence is due by the Claimant Reply deadline, and the Respondent's additional evidence is due by the Respondent Rejoinder deadline.
10.3. The Claimant may not use the Respondent's Rejoinder period to introduce new Reply materials without permission.
10.4. The Respondent shall have a separate and effective opportunity to respond to the Claimant's Reply and any evidence filed with it.
10.5. JudgeAI may modify the timetable if supported by platform configuration or manual administration and if:
a. the arbitration agreement so provides;
b. both parties agree;
c. the Record shows good reason;
d. technical access problems affected a party's ability to file;
e. new evidence could not reasonably have been submitted earlier;
f. fairness requires modification.
10.6. Any modification shall be recorded in the Data Room.
Article 11. Applicable Law, Seat, and Language
11.1. The procedural law of the arbitration shall be determined by the seat or legal place of arbitration, if agreed or determined. The current platform records and analyzes seat/forum signals from the filed record but does not yet provide a separate seat-selection form.
11.2. The merits shall be decided under the law or rules of law chosen by the parties.
11.3. If the parties have not chosen the applicable law for the merits, JudgeAI shall determine the applicable law or governing legal framework from the Record. It shall consider, as relevant:
a. the governing law clause;
b. the arbitration agreement;
c. the seat or forum;
d. the place of performance;
e. the place where the relevant obligation arose;
f. the parties' domicile, registration, or principal place of business;
g. the language and currency of the contract;
h. mandatory rules;
i. trade usages;
j. private international law principles;
k. the parties' submissions.
11.4. If applicable law is disputed, JudgeAI shall treat it as an issue for determination and provide reasons.
11.5. If no express governing law is detected, JudgeAI shall not omit the issue. The Award must state the law or governing framework applied and the reasons for applying it.
11.6. The language of arbitration shall be the language agreed by the parties. If none is agreed, the current decision workflow writes in the dominant language of the case materials where clear, otherwise in English. A separate language-selection control is not currently implemented.
11.7. Documents in another language may be considered if readable by the platform, but JudgeAI may require translation or may treat untranslated materials as carrying reduced evidentiary weight where fairness requires.
Article 12. Evidence and Document Record
12.1. Each party shall submit the documents and evidence on which it relies within the applicable filing window.
12.2. Evidence should be submitted in searchable or machine-readable form where possible.
12.3. The current platform accepts TXT, MD, JSON, CSV, PDF, and DOCX uploads in the Data Room. Other formats, including images, audio, and video, require later platform support or separate agreement and may not be processed in the current version.
12.4. Each document should, where possible, include:
a. a descriptive title;
b. page numbers;
c. exhibit numbering;
d. references to the facts or arguments it supports;
e. date and author, if relevant.
12.5. JudgeAI classifies filed documents by party, filing stage, and document type in the Data Room. Reliability, relevance, probative value, chronology, and evidentiary gaps are assessed in the AI decision workflow.
12.6. JudgeAI may consider:
a. consistency with other evidence;
b. source and authorship;
c. chronology;
d. internal contradictions;
e. corroboration;
f. completeness;
g. whether the opposing party had a fair opportunity to respond.
12.7. Evidence filed after the applicable deadline shall not be admitted unless JudgeAI permits it under Article 13.
Article 13. Late Evidence, Amendments, and Extensions
13.1. A party seeking to submit late evidence or amend a claim or defence must request permission through the Data Room or another approved communication channel. A dedicated late-evidence request workflow is not currently automated in the platform.
13.2. JudgeAI may permit late evidence or amendment if:
a. the evidence was not reasonably available earlier;
b. the submission is necessary to avoid serious unfairness;
c. the other party can be given a fair opportunity to respond;
d. the amendment does not exceed the scope of the arbitration agreement;
e. the delay is justified.
13.3. JudgeAI may refuse late evidence if admission would create unfair prejudice, delay, or procedural imbalance.
13.4. If late evidence is admitted, JudgeAI may reopen or extend the timetable to allow the other party to respond, where supported by platform configuration or manual administration.
Article 14. Failure to Participate and Procedural Default
14.1. In the current platform, the AI decision workflow for a party arbitration room requires an Answer before it can run. A default or no-Answer procedure may be added later if notice and reasonable opportunity to participate can be verified.
14.2. Failure to file an Answer shall not automatically be treated as admission of the claim.
14.3. If a party fails to file a Reply, Rejoinder, or evidence within the applicable period, JudgeAI may proceed on the existing Record after the procedural timetable closes.
14.4. JudgeAI may draw appropriate evidentiary conclusions from a party's failure to produce evidence that would reasonably be expected to be within that party's control.
Article 15. Closure of the Record
15.1. The Record shall close upon expiry of the final procedural deadline unless JudgeAI orders otherwise.
15.2. After closure of the Record, no further evidence or submissions shall be admitted except by permission under Article 13 or to correct a technical filing error.
15.3. Once the Record is closed, JudgeAI may initiate the AI decision workflow.
15.4. The Data Room shall record the date and time of closure.
Article 16. AI Decision Workflow
16.1. After closure of the Record, JudgeAI shall analyze the case using a staged AI decision workflow.
16.2. The workflow may include:
a. extraction of claims and relief;
b. extraction of defences and objections;
c. issue mapping;
d. evidence indexing;
e. applicable law assessment;
f. factual chronology;
g. evidence reliability and weight assessment;
h. legal and contractual analysis;
i. remedy and quantum analysis;
j. generation of a reasoned Award or draft Award.
16.3. The workflow shall use only the Record and the permitted procedural metadata, except where applicable law requires the Tribunal to identify mandatory rules or general legal principles.
16.4. The workflow shall distinguish:
a. alleged facts;
b. admitted facts;
c. disputed facts;
d. established facts;
e. unsupported assertions;
f. unresolved evidentiary gaps.
16.5. JudgeAI may generate internal analytical artifacts. Internal artifacts are not the Award unless expressly designated as such.
16.6. The Award shall not expose internal system identifiers, backend mechanics, model prompts, or technical scoring labels unless the parties have agreed otherwise or disclosure is required by law.
Article 17. Award
17.1. The Award shall be reasoned.
17.2. The Award should include:
a. identification of the parties;
b. procedural background;
c. summary of claims and defences;
d. issues for determination;
e. applicable law and contract interpretation;
f. findings of fact and evidence assessment;
g. analysis and reasons;
h. decision or disposition;
i. remedies, amounts, interest, costs, or performance obligations, where applicable;
j. date and electronic issuance record.
17.3. The Award must contain a standalone determination of applicable law or governing legal framework. If the issue is disputed or not expressly agreed, the Award must state the reasons for the determination.
17.4. The Award may be generated rapidly after closure of the Record, but no fixed issuance time is guaranteed unless expressly stated in the arbitration agreement or procedural order.
17.5. The legal binding effect of the Award depends on the arbitration agreement, the law of the seat, and any mandatory requirements for recognition or enforcement.
Article 18. Corrections, Clarifications, and Additional Determinations
18.1. A party may request correction of clerical, computational, typographical, formatting, or similar errors within 30 days after receipt of the Award, unless a different period is fixed. A dedicated correction-request workflow is not currently automated and may require manual platform administration.
18.2. A party may request clarification or interpretation of the Award within 30 days after receipt if the operative disposition is ambiguous. A dedicated clarification workflow is not currently automated.
18.3. A party may request an additional determination if a claim or issue submitted in the arbitration was omitted from the Award. This is not currently implemented as a separate self-service platform action.
18.4. JudgeAI may correct obvious clerical or technical errors on its own initiative within a reasonable period where manual administration or later product functionality supports it.
18.5. Corrections and clarifications shall form part of the arbitration record.
Article 19. Confidentiality
19.1. The arbitration, Data Room, submissions, evidence, procedural orders, internal workflow outputs, and Award are confidential unless:
a. the parties agree otherwise;
b. disclosure is required by law;
c. disclosure is necessary for recognition, enforcement, correction, challenge, or protection of legal rights;
d. disclosure is required for platform security, audit, or compliance purposes under the Privacy Policy.
19.2. Users with access to the Data Room shall use case materials only for the arbitration and related legal purposes.
19.3. JudgeAI may retain technical logs and procedural metadata as necessary for security, auditability, legal compliance, and operation of the platform.
Article 20. Data Protection and Security
20.1. JudgeAI shall process personal data and case materials in accordance with its Privacy Policy and applicable data protection laws.
20.2. JudgeAI shall apply reasonable technical and organizational measures to protect case materials.
20.3. Parties are responsible for avoiding unnecessary submission of irrelevant personal data, privileged materials, or third-party confidential information.
20.4. If a party believes that privileged or mistakenly submitted material has been filed, it shall notify JudgeAI promptly.
Article 21. Costs and Fees
21.1. Platform fees, arbitration costs, and any legal costs shall be governed by the arbitration agreement, the platform pricing terms, and any procedural order. The current Data Room does not yet provide a structured costs-submission module.
21.2. Unless otherwise agreed, each party bears its own legal costs during the proceedings.
21.3. The Award may address costs if the parties' submissions, arbitration agreement, and applicable law provide a sufficient basis. Structured costs allocation is not currently a separate automated platform module.
21.4. In allocating costs, JudgeAI may consider:
a. the outcome;
b. procedural conduct;
c. unnecessary delay;
d. unreasonable refusal to cooperate;
e. submission of false or misleading evidence;
f. proportionality.
Article 22. Enforcement and Compliance
22.1. The parties shall comply with the Award to the extent it is binding under the arbitration agreement and applicable law.
22.2. Recognition and enforcement of any Award shall be governed by applicable arbitration law, the law of the seat, and any relevant treaty, including the New York Convention where applicable.
22.3. JudgeAI does not itself enforce Awards through courts or public authorities. Enforcement is the responsibility of the party seeking enforcement unless otherwise agreed.
22.4. JudgeAI may provide electronic records, procedural logs, and copies of the Award as may be reasonably necessary for enforcement, subject to confidentiality, data protection, and applicable law.
Article 23. Platform Limitations
23.1. JudgeAI analyzes the Record provided by the parties. It is not responsible for false, incomplete, forged, misleading, or unlawfully obtained evidence submitted by a party.
23.2. JudgeAI may flag deficiencies, contradictions, unreadable documents, missing evidence, or procedural gaps, but the parties remain responsible for the content and accuracy of their submissions.
23.3. If the platform experiences a technical failure materially affecting a party's ability to participate, JudgeAI may suspend, extend, or reopen the affected procedural period where manual administration or later platform functionality supports it.
23.4. The platform may refuse files that exceed technical limits, contain malware, are unreadable, or cannot reasonably be processed.
Article 24. Amendments and Transitional Provisions
24.1. JudgeAI may amend these Rules from time to time.
24.2. Unless otherwise stated, amendments apply to cases commenced after the effective date of the amended Rules.
24.3. Pending cases continue under the Rules in force at commencement unless the parties agree to apply the amended Rules or JudgeAI determines that a procedural update is necessary and does not prejudice either party.
24.4. Procedural updates to the platform interface, data room display, security measures, or technical processing may apply to pending cases if they do not alter substantive rights or materially prejudice a party's procedural opportunity.
Appendix A. Default Procedural Timetable
Unless otherwise ordered, configured, or agreed:1. Request / Statement of Claim: filed by Claimant to commence arbitration.
2. Notice to Respondent: sent electronically after creation of the Data Room.
3. Answer / Response: required before post-Answer timetable and AI review. A 14 calendar day Answer period may be used if stated in the notice, arbitration agreement, or platform configuration, but the current Data Room does not auto-enforce a default Answer deadline.
4. Claimant Reply and evidence: 14 calendar days after the Answer or procedural timetable is issued, under current default configuration.
5. Respondent Rejoinder and evidence: 14 calendar days after expiry of the Claimant Reply period, under current default configuration.
6. Record closure: upon expiry of the Respondent Rejoinder period.
7. AI decision workflow: begins after record closure, automatically or manually depending on platform configuration.
8. Award or draft Award: issued after completion of the AI decision workflow.