On AI-assisted adjudication, concerns including biases (such as automation bias, anchoring bias, contrarian bias, and herd bias) and ethical worries (such as human adjudicators ceasing to be decision-makers, excessive standardisation of decisions, and the fact that judges may be pressured to conform to the AI’s predictions) can be addressed. Adjudicators may use AI to assist them in their decisions in three aspects: training and implementation; actual use; and monitoring. Because AI will not be able to provide the legal justifications underlying its predictions, the human adjudicator will have to explain why the AI-generated prediction is legally justified. AI will not replace adjudicators.

After the establishment of various international commercial courts in Asia, Continental Europe is now following Asia’s example by establishing its own. This chapter discusses the reasons for the new international commercial courts in France, Germany and the Netherlands. It then sets out how the three European countries position their international commercial courts, looking at the different procedures, functions and organization. The chapter distinguishes these courts from their Asian counterparts, and compares them to each other. This is done by looking at changes of legislation, whether English is used for the full procedures or only partially, by reviewing the courts’ rules of procedure, by discussing their (online) accessibility and by reviewing how the courts have functioned so far.

The rise of international commercial courts in the past fifteen years or so is a game changer for dispute resolution. The thriving success of the Commercial Court of England and Wales may be the source of inspiration for the design and operation of a number of the existing international commercial Courts. notably, it is often said that the international commercial courts compete for lucrative judicial business but this so-called competition has never been properly analysed. Are these courts competing for the same kinds of judicial business? Are their frameworks strategically designed to advance their ambition? This chapter examines the jurisdictional frameworks of three notable international commercial courts: the Chinese International Commercial Court, the Commercial Court of England and Wales and the Singapore International Commercial Court. The discussion shows that a careful scrutiny of the jurisdictional rules of the aforesaid courts will tell us a lot about their respective strategic interests and competitive advantages.