Document type: Toolkit Practice area: Litigation — Arbitration Jurisdiction: International Last reviewed: 5 September 2026

1. Model international arbitration clause

ARTICLE ___ — DISPUTE RESOLUTION

(a) Negotiation. Any dispute arising out of, relating to, or in
connection with this Agreement (a "Dispute") shall first be
referred to a senior executive of each Party for good-faith
negotiation. If not resolved within thirty (30) days of written
notice of the Dispute, either Party may commence arbitration.
This provision does not prevent a Party from seeking interim or
conservatory relief at any time.

(b) Arbitration. Any Dispute not resolved under (a), including
any question regarding this Agreement's existence, validity,
breach, termination, or invalidity, shall be finally resolved by
arbitration administered by the [International Chamber of
Commerce] under its [Rules of Arbitration] in effect at the time
the Request for Arbitration is filed.

(c) Seat. The seat of the arbitration shall be [city, country].
Hearings and meetings may be held at any location the tribunal
considers convenient, and any such hearing or meeting shall not
change the seat.

(d) Tribunal. The tribunal shall consist of [one arbitrator /
three arbitrators]. [For three: Each Party shall nominate one
arbitrator within thirty (30) days. The two party-nominated
arbitrators shall jointly nominate the president within thirty
(30) days of the confirmation of the second. If any nomination
is not made within these periods, the appointment shall be made
by the [institution].] No arbitrator shall be a national of the
same country as any Party.

(e) Language. The arbitration shall be conducted in [English].
Documents in another language shall be accompanied by a
translation of the relevant portions into [English].

(f) Governing law. This Agreement shall be governed by the law
of [X], excluding its conflict-of-laws rules and the United
Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of
Goods. THIS ARBITRATION AGREEMENT shall be governed by the law
of [Y].

(g) Evidence. The tribunal shall be guided by the IBA Rules on
the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (as in
effect at the commencement of the arbitration) in determining
requests for the production of documents.

(h) Interim relief. Nothing in this Article prevents a Party
from seeking interim, provisional, or conservatory measures from
any court of competent jurisdiction. An application for such
measures shall not be deemed incompatible with, or a waiver of,
this agreement to arbitrate.

(i) Costs. The tribunal shall award the costs of the
arbitration, including the reasonable legal fees and expenses of
the prevailing Party, as it considers appropriate having regard
to the outcome and the conduct of the Parties.

(j) Interest. Interest shall accrue on any sum awarded at
[__]% per annum from [the date of breach / the date of the
Request] until payment.

(k) Confidentiality. The existence of the arbitration, the
submissions, the evidence, and the award shall be confidential,
except as necessary to enforce or challenge the award, to comply
with applicable law or a court or regulatory order, or to make
disclosure to a Party's professional advisers, auditors,
insurers, or lenders under a duty of confidence.

(l) Consolidation and joinder. The tribunal may, on the
application of any Party, consolidate this arbitration with any
other arbitration between the Parties or their affiliates
arising out of the same or a related transaction, and may join
any additional party bound by an arbitration agreement in
substantially the same terms.

(m) Enforcement. Judgment upon the award may be entered in any
court having jurisdiction thereof. Each Party irrevocably waives
any objection to the enforcement of an award on grounds of
sovereign immunity, to the fullest extent permitted by law.

Drafting notes.

(c) is the single most important subsection. The seat determines the supervisory courts, the arbitration law, and which court can set the award aside. The second sentence prevents the argument that holding a hearing elsewhere moved the seat. Clauses that name a "location" without naming a seat produce preliminary disputes that cost months.

(f)'s second sentence is the one most often omitted. The law governing the contract and the law governing the arbitration agreement can differ, and where the clause addresses only the first, the validity and scope of the arbitration agreement itself becomes a choice-of-law question. Name both.

(a) creates a condition precedent. Under BG Group plc v. Republic of Argentina, 572 U.S. 25 (2014), such preconditions are generally procedural questions for the tribunal — but a claimant that ignores one gives the respondent a preliminary objection and a costs argument. The carve-out in the last sentence prevents the negotiation period from blocking urgent relief.

(g) matters in cases that turn on the other side's documents. Without it, the production standard is whatever the tribunal decides at the first conference.

(h) removes an argument the counterparty will otherwise make when you go to court for an asset freeze.

(l) is worth including in multi-contract transactions. Without consolidation and joinder language, related disputes proceed as separate arbitrations before different tribunals, which is expensive and produces inconsistent outcomes.

(m)'s immunity waiver is essential where any counterparty is state-connected. Immunity from execution is waivable, and a waiver obtained in the contract is worth a great deal more than one sought after an award.

What to leave out: expanded judicial review of the award. It is unenforceable under the FAA and travels poorly elsewhere.

2. Arbitrator vetting questionnaire

Use for every candidate, including the chair.

CANDIDATE: ______________________  PROPOSED ROLE: ___________

1. BACKGROUND
   Nationality / nationalities:
   Qualifications and admissions:
   Current position and firm/chambers:
   Languages (working fluency in the contract language?):

2. EXPERIENCE
   Number of appointments in the past 5 years:
   As chair / sole:            As co-arbitrator:
   Sector experience relevant to this dispute:
   Experience with the applicable substantive law:
   Experience with this institution's rules:
   Experience at this seat:

3. PUBLISHED VIEWS
   Awards published or reported:
   Books, articles, speeches on issues in this case:
   Any stated position on [key legal issue]:

4. APPOINTMENT HISTORY
   Appointments by our opponent or its counsel (5 years):
   Appointments by our client or its counsel (5 years):
   Repeat appointments by any party or firm:
   Any current appointment with a party or counsel here:

5. INDEPENDENCE AND IMPARTIALITY
   Conflicts run against: our client, affiliates, counsel,
   witnesses, experts, funder:
   IBA Guidelines list classification (red / orange / green):
   Any relationship requiring disclosure:

6. AVAILABILITY
   Current caseload:
   Availability for a hearing in [month/year]:
   Typical time from close of record to award:
   Stated commitment to the timetable:

7. WORKING STYLE
   Active or passive in hearings:
   Attitude to document production:
   Attitude to expert conferencing:
   Reputation for prompt awards:

8. ASSESSMENT
   Fit for this case (1-5):
   Risks:
   Recommend? [ ] Yes  [ ] No

Drafting notes.

Section 6 predicts more delay than any other factor. An excellent arbitrator with no availability produces an award two years later than a good arbitrator with time. Ask the availability question directly and in writing.

Section 4 is a disclosure and challenge issue. Repeat appointments by the same party or firm appear on the IBA orange list and can support a challenge. Know the history before you nominate, and before you accept the other side's nominee.

Section 3 is where the real intelligence is. Arbitrators write, and what they have written about the issue at the center of your case is the best available predictor.

3. Draft Procedural Order No. 1 — outline

Bring this to the first conference. The party with a draft frames the discussion.

PROCEDURAL ORDER NO. 1

1.  THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT AND CONSTITUTION OF THE TRIBUNAL
2.  APPLICABLE RULES, SEAT, AND LANGUAGE
    2.1 Rules; 2.2 Seat (and that hearings elsewhere do not
    change it); 2.3 Language; 2.4 Translation protocol and who
    bears cost
3.  COMMUNICATIONS AND FILING
    3.1 Electronic filing platform; 3.2 Copies and format;
    3.3 No ex parte communications; 3.4 Tribunal secretary and
    the scope of the secretary's role
4.  PROCEDURAL TIMETABLE (Annex A)
5.  WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
    5.1 Sequential memorials; 5.2 Content: facts, law,
    exhibits, witness statements, expert reports, relief;
    5.3 Page limits; 5.4 Exhibit numbering (C-__ / R-__ for
    factual, CL-__ / RL-__ for legal authorities)
6.  DOCUMENT PRODUCTION
    6.1 IBA Rules to guide; 6.2 Redfern Schedule (Annex B);
    6.3 Deadlines for requests, objections, replies, decision,
    production; 6.4 Format and metadata; 6.5 Privilege standard
    to be applied; 6.6 Confidentiality of produced documents;
    6.7 Adverse inferences under IBA Article 9
7.  WITNESS EVIDENCE
    7.1 Written statements stand as direct evidence; 7.2 Content
    and form; 7.3 Cross-examination only for witnesses whose
    attendance is requested; 7.4 Consequences of non-appearance
8.  EXPERT EVIDENCE
    8.1 Party-appointed; 8.2 Sequential reports; 8.3 Experts to
    confer without counsel and file a JOINT STATEMENT of
    agreement and disagreement by [date]; 8.4 Witness
    conferencing at the hearing
9.  HEARING
    9.1 Dates and venue/format; 9.2 Equal time allocation and
    chess clock; 9.3 Transcription; 9.4 Interpretation;
    9.5 Hearing bundle: one owner, hyperlinked, common
    pagination; 9.6 Pre-hearing conference date
10. POST-HEARING
    10.1 Post-hearing briefs; 10.2 Cost submissions;
    10.3 Close of proceedings
11. CONFIDENTIALITY
12. COSTS AND THE ADVANCE
13. AMENDMENT OF THIS ORDER

ANNEX A — PROCEDURAL TIMETABLE
ANNEX B — REDFERN SCHEDULE FORMAT

Drafting notes.

Paragraph 8.3 is the highest-value line in the order. Expert conferral narrows cases dramatically and occasionally ends them. Ask for it here; asking later is harder.

Paragraph 6.5 saves weeks. Privilege standards differ across legal systems — in-house counsel communications, settlement communications, and litigation preparation are treated differently — and deciding the standard once beats litigating it document by document.

Paragraph 3.4 matters more than it looks. Tribunal secretaries are common and useful; disputes arise when a secretary's role expands beyond administration. Define it.

Paragraph 9.5 is not administrative. A poorly assembled bundle costs hearing days.

4. Redfern Schedule — format and model entries

| No | Documents Requested | Relevance & Materiality | Objections | Reply | Tribunal Decision |

Model entry — good:

No: 4
Documents Requested:
  Monthly production output reports for Line 3 at the Ostrava
  facility, 1 January 2022 - 31 December 2024, in the format
  generated by Respondent's manufacturing execution system.

Relevance & Materiality:
  Respondent reported royalty-bearing output of 4,100 tonnes for
  this period (R-23). Claimant's expert calculates minimum Line 3
  output of 6,800 tonnes from Respondent's public environmental
  filings (C-88, ¶¶ 31-40). The reports will establish actual
  output and are material to the quantum of underpaid royalties,
  the central issue in this arbitration. The documents are not in
  Claimant's possession and are generated and retained by
  Respondent in the ordinary course (see R-23 at 2, referring to
  "MES output data").

Objections: [Respondent completes]
Reply: [Claimant completes]
Tribunal Decision: [Tribunal completes]

Model entry — bad, and why:

No: 4
Documents Requested:
  All documents relating to the manufacture, sale, and
  distribution of the Licensed Products.

Relevance & Materiality:
  These documents are relevant to Claimant's claims.

Why it fails: not a document or a narrow and specific category; no explanation of materiality to an issue; no basis for believing the documents exist or are held by the respondent; and it reads like an American document request, which tribunals refuse and remember.

Drafting notes.

Fifteen requests, not sixty. Tribunals grant a higher proportion of a disciplined schedule.

Name custodians when you know them. "Communications between the finance director and the Ostrava plant manager" is grantable. "Communications among Respondent's personnel" is not.

Anticipate the narrowing. Tribunals frequently grant a request in reduced form. Draft so that the reduced form is still useful.

Preserve the adverse inference. If a request is granted and nothing is produced, say so in the next submission and ask the tribunal to draw the inference permitted by IBA Article 9.

5. Witness statement skeleton

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER THE [___] RULES
[Claimant] v. [Respondent]  —  Case No. ____

           WITNESS STATEMENT OF [NAME]

1. INTRODUCTION
   1.1 My name is ___. I am ___ at ___. I have held that
       position since ___.
   1.2 I make this statement from my own knowledge except where
       I indicate otherwise, in which case I identify the source
       and state that I believe it to be true.
   1.3 I have been shown the documents referred to below.
   1.4 [Any interest in the outcome; any relationship to a
       Party; whether counsel assisted in preparing this
       statement.]

2. MY ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES
   [Enough for the tribunal to know why this witness knows what
   the statement says.]

3. BACKGROUND TO THE AGREEMENT
   [Chronological. Documents integrated with exhibit numbers.]

4. [THE EVENTS IN ISSUE — one section per topic]
   4.1 On 14 March 2023 I sent [name] the revised delivery
       schedule [Exhibit C-112] because ___.
   4.2 [Address the difficult documents here, not for the first
       time under cross-examination.]

5. RESPONSE TO [OTHER SIDE'S] STATEMENT
   [Where responding to an earlier statement, address it
   specifically by paragraph.]

6. STATEMENT OF TRUTH
   I confirm that the contents of this statement are true to the
   best of my knowledge and belief.

   Signed: ______________  Date: ____________

Drafting notes.

Paragraph 1.4 on counsel assistance is increasingly expected. In most international practice counsel may assist; disclosing it removes a cross-examination line and costs nothing.

Section 4 is the statement. It should read as a person describing what happened, with documents woven in. A statement written in legal register will be discounted and will make the witness look coached.

Address the bad documents. A witness first confronted with an adverse email at the hearing looks evasive whether or not there is an innocent explanation.

Length discipline. Twenty pages for a central witness; five to ten for a supporting one.

6. Expert conferral direction — model language

By [date], the Parties' [quantum / technical] experts shall
confer, without counsel present, and shall jointly prepare and
sign a statement setting out:

(a) the issues on which they agree, with the agreed conclusion;
(b) the issues on which they disagree;
(c) for each such issue, a short statement of each expert's
    position and the reason for the disagreement, identifying
    the specific assumption, input, or methodological choice
    that produces the difference; and
(d) any issue on which agreement could be reached if a factual
    matter were determined one way or the other, identifying
    that factual matter.

The joint statement shall not exceed [15] pages. Counsel shall
not participate in its preparation. The experts may exchange
working papers and calculations for this purpose.

Drafting notes.

Subparagraph (c) is what makes this work. Experts who must identify the specific input driving the difference cannot hide behind methodological fog, and the tribunal is left with a short list of decidable questions.

Subparagraph (d) is the settlement lever. When a joint statement says "if the tribunal finds the defect was present at manufacture, the experts agree the loss is €18.4 million," the parties can see the case.

"Without counsel present" is not optional. Conferrals with counsel in the room produce statements that restate the reports.

7. Cost submission outline

I.   SUMMARY OF COSTS CLAIMED
     Table: legal fees, expert fees, institutional fees,
     tribunal fees, disbursements. Total.

II.  THE TRIBUNAL'S POWER TO AWARD COSTS
     [Rules provision] and Article ___ of the arbitration
     agreement.

III. THE PRINCIPLE: COSTS FOLLOW THE EVENT
     Outcome by claim. Identify which Party prevailed on what.

IV.  REASONABLENESS
     A. Fee earners, rates, and hours by phase
     B. Comparison to the amount in dispute
     C. Comparison to the other side's costs, if disclosed
     D. Proportionality of the expert spend

V.   CONDUCT
     A. Claims abandoned and when
     B. Document production conduct
     C. Procedural applications made and their outcomes
     D. Any failure to comply with tribunal orders
     E. Settlement conduct, if the rules permit reference to it

VI.  THIRD-PARTY FUNDING
     [Disclose where required by the rules or the seat.]

VII. RELIEF SOUGHT

ANNEX 1 — Phase-by-phase breakdown
ANNEX 2 — Fee earner rates and experience
ANNEX 3 — Disbursement schedule

Drafting notes.

Section V is where cases are won and lost on costs. Tribunals shift costs readily and they take conduct seriously. A party that abandoned three claims on the eve of the hearing will pay for them.

Keep contemporaneous records from day one. A phase-by-phase breakdown reconstructed after the fact is discounted, and tribunals can tell.

Address the other side's costs if they are disclosed. A submission that says "the Respondent's own costs of €3.1 million confirm the reasonableness of the Claimant's €3.4 million" is efficient advocacy.

8. Petition to confirm a Convention award (U.S. district court)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
[DISTRICT]

[PETITIONER],                    Case No. ______
     Petitioner,
v.                               PETITION TO CONFIRM FOREIGN
                                 ARBITRAL AWARD
[RESPONDENT],                    (9 U.S.C. §§ 201-208)
     Respondent.


1. Petitioner petitions this Court under 9 U.S.C. § 207 to
confirm the arbitral award rendered in its favor on [date] in
[seat] (the "Award," Ex. 1, with certified translation Ex. 1A).

                      THE AGREEMENT

2. The parties' [Agreement] dated [date] (Ex. 2, translation
Ex. 2A) provides at Article __ that disputes shall be finally
resolved by arbitration administered by [institution] under its
[rules], with the seat in [city, country].

              THE AWARD FALLS UNDER THE CONVENTION

3. The Award arises out of a commercial legal relationship and
is not entirely between citizens of the United States:
Petitioner is a [country] company and Respondent is a [country]
company. 9 U.S.C. § 202.

4. [Country of the seat] and the United States are Contracting
States to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of
Foreign Arbitral Awards of 10 June 1958.

                 JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction under 9
U.S.C. § 203, which provides that an action falling under the
Convention is deemed to arise under the laws and treaties of the
United States, regardless of the amount in controversy.

6. Venue is proper under 9 U.S.C. § 204 because [Respondent
resides or has a place of business in this district / the
Agreement designates this district].

7. Personal jurisdiction exists because [specific contacts /
property in the district].

                     THE ARBITRATION

8-12. [Procedural history: request, constitution of the
tribunal, submissions, hearing, award. Emphasize notice and
opportunity to be heard at every stage — this forecloses the
Article V(1)(b) defense.]

                    THE AWARD IS FINAL

13. The Award is final and binding under Article __ of the
[rules]. No application to set aside has been filed at the seat
[or: an application was filed on [date] and dismissed on
[date], Ex. 3].

14. Respondent has not paid any portion of the Award.

                     CONFIRMATION IS REQUIRED

15. Section 207 provides that the court "shall confirm the award
unless it finds one of the grounds for refusal or deferral of
recognition or enforcement of the award specified in the said
Convention." None applies.

16. This Petition is filed within three years of the Award as
required by 9 U.S.C. § 207.

17. Petitioner submits the documents required by Article IV of
the Convention: the duly authenticated original Award or a
certified copy (Ex. 1), the original arbitration agreement or a
certified copy (Ex. 2), and certified translations of each
(Exs. 1A, 2A).

                      RELIEF REQUESTED

Petitioner requests an order confirming the Award and entering
judgment for [currency and amount], converted to U.S. dollars at
the exchange rate on [date/judgment date], plus post-judgment
interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961, and costs.

Drafting notes.

Paragraphs 8 through 12 exist to defeat Article V(1)(b). The most commonly raised defense is that the respondent was unable to present its case. A petition that recites, step by step, the notices given and the opportunities afforded makes that defense visibly untenable.

Paragraph 17 tracks Article IV, which specifies exactly what the applicant must supply. Supplying less invites a fight about form.

Paragraph 5 is why Convention practice is easier than domestic practice. Section 203 is a genuine federal jurisdictional grant, so the Badgerow v. Walters, 596 U.S. 1 (2022) problem — no look-through for § 9 confirmations — does not arise.

Currency conversion should be addressed expressly. Courts differ on the appropriate conversion date; propose one and explain it rather than leaving it to be resolved after judgment.

If a set-aside application is pending at the seat, disclose it. Article VI permits the enforcing court to adjourn and to require security. Address it directly and ask for security if adjournment is likely.

9. Quick reference

Question Answer Source
Does the Convention apply? Not entirely between U.S. citizens, or U.S. parties with a foreign relation 9 U.S.C. § 202
Federal jurisdiction? Automatic — no amount, no diversity 9 U.S.C. § 203
Removal? Any time before trial, "relates to" standard 9 U.S.C. § 205
Time to confirm? Three years 9 U.S.C. § 207
Defenses? Article V — five party-invoked, two court-raised Convention Art. V
Panama Convention instead? Majority OAS/Panama parties 9 U.S.C. § 305
Discovery under § 1782? Not for private commercial arbitration ZF Automotive
Non-signatory enforcement? Convention does not bar domestic estoppel doctrines GE Energy
Treaty preconditions? Presumptively for the arbitrators BG Group

Related documents

This toolkit is general information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Templates require adaptation by counsel to the institution, the seat, and the governing law.