Asia-Pacific arbitration on the rise: Key trends claimants should know
In recent years, arbitration in Asia has transitioned from addressing predominantly regional matters to playing an integral role in global dispute resolution. Institutions across the region have not only experienced expanded caseloads but have also established themselves as valid alternatives to traditional Western arbitral seats.
This growth reflects the increasingly sophisticated Asian markets and the confidence that the international community now places in regional institutions and courts. At the same time, clear trends are emerging: The divergence between institutions’ experiencing high-value and high-volume caseloads, the rising global rankings of Asian seats and institutions and the continued reinforcement of pro-arbitration judicial frameworks in several jurisdictions. Together, these developments signal a maturing ecosystem that is reshaping arbitration dynamics not only regionally, but also worldwide.
Growth in arbitral institutions throughout Asia
Six key Asian arbitral institutions recorded increases in caseload from 2018 to 2024, according to Asian Dispute Review:
-
The Beijing Arbitration Centre (BAC)
-
The China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC)
-
The Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC)
-
The Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration (SCIA)
-
The Shanghai International Arbitration Centre (SHIAC)
-
The Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC).
The Asian Dispute Review reports that while SIAC is experiencing growth, SHIAC and HKIAC have experienced even faster growth between 2018 and 2024—particularly in terms of total and average amounts in dispute. Over this six year period, SIAC saw a 68% increase in total amounts in dispute, while HKIAC’s total increased by 103%, and SHIAC’s by 251.8% . This upward trajectory underscores the growing scale and complexity of cases being resolved through Asian arbitral institutions.
Additionally, ICC data shows that Singapore saw 28 ICC arbitral tribunals in 2024, ranking it ninth on the list of the top 10 jurisdictions globally for ICC-administered arbitrations. This geographic diversification of caseloads highlights the increasing appeal of Asian jurisdictions as venues for international arbitration. It also reflects the broader maturation of the Chinese arbitral market and the continuing integration of Asia into the global arbitration landscape—a trend that may have been accelerated by the Covid-19 pandemic’s disruption of traditional regional case flows and the ensuing adoption of more flexible, virtual proceedings.
High-value cases concentrated in fewer proceedings outside mainland China
Hong Kong and Singapore have increasingly positioned themselves as hubs for higher-value arbitration cases in recent years. In 2024, HKIAC’s average case value was US$48.1m (352 cases), and SIAC’s was US$34.4m (625 cases). In contrast, Asian Dispute Review reports that large mainland China institutions such as CIETAC (~6,000 cases) and SHIAC (~4,000 cases) handle far more matters annually, but the average matter values range between US$1m–US$4.3m.
This divergence highlights two coexisting and complementary models within Asia-Pacific arbitration. On one hand, Hong Kong and Singapore are consolidating their status as centers for complex, cross-border and often multi-jurisdictional disputes—frequently involving international parties, major infrastructure projects and high-value commercial contracts. On the other, mainland China’s arbitral institutions are thriving on domestic and regional demand, offering more accessible and cost-efficient venues for resolving a broad spectrum of commercial cases.
APAC continues its rise in global seat and institution rankings
The Asia-Pacific region is solidifying its reputation as a leading hub for international arbitration, with both seats and institutions gaining global prominence. Global Arbitration Review (GAR) reports that in 2021, the Queen Mary University of London Survey ranked Singapore and Hong Kong as the first and third most popular arbitral seats globally, with three Asian institutions (SIAC, HKIAC, CIETAC) among the top five worldwide.
ICC data confirms the global interest in the region: In 2024, the PRC and Hong Kong SAR ranked in the top 10 jurisdictions for new ICC cases, with Singapore hosting 28 ICC tribunals (9th globally, as mentioned above). This rise in seat and institution rankings is supported by pro-arbitration legislation, modernized institutional rules (such as the SIAC 2025 Rules) and minimal judicial interference in jurisdictions such as Singapore.
Strong pro-arbitration court approaches bolster international confidence in APAC
Despite some more conservative regulatory pushes in Mainland China, several key court decisions have increased the international community’s comfort level with APAC-seated arbitrations. For example, GAR reports that Singapore courts have set aside only ~20% of awards challenged over the last 20 years, showing a clear commitment to minimal curial intervention. Asian Dispute Review notes that Hong Kong’s Interim Measures Arrangement with mainland China (2019–2025) has seen 157 applications to HKIAC, with 113/119 applications granted, preserving US$3.6 billion in assets. This result demonstrates the jurisdiction’s commitment to cross-border judicial cooperation.
These developments enhance confidence in Asia-Pacific seats when parties are choosing where to arbitrate their disputes, particularly when the disputes in question are complex, high-value, or multi-jurisdictional. GAR states that, “The steady growth of Asia’s arbitration scene reflects the increased willingness of Asian and other international parties to resolve their disputes within the region. It also demonstrates the distinction of the region’s seats and institutions, and their strong reputations around the globe. The pro-arbitration stance taken by jurisdictions in the region has greatly enhanced the standing of arbitration at home and beyond, creating a healthy ecosystem that continues to thrive.”
How Burford Capital can work with parties involved in arbitration disputes
Burford’s international arbitration team is ranked Band 1 by Chambers and Partners, and is recognized for its unmatched expertise and scale in legal finance. The team offers a range of tailored capital solutions for parties seeking to manage the costs and risks of arbitration disputes.
Single-case funding remains a core offering, providing financing for legal fees, tribunal costs and expert expenses in both international commercial and investor-state arbitrations. This structure allows claimants to pursue meritorious claims without tying up internal capital or bearing the financial risk of the proceedings.
Beyond individual cases, Burford increasingly structures portfolio financing, offering companies and law firms capital backed by a group of matters. These portfolios, often combining litigations and arbitrations, allow clients to unlock capital on more favorable terms while diversifying risk across multiple claims.
Burford also provides award monetization, enabling clients to accelerate payment of arbitral awards or pending claims. This approach converts a pending recovery into immediate liquidity, improving balance-sheet efficiency and freeing up cash for reinvestment in business operations.
With over $7 billion in group-wide capital and a track record of supporting some of the largest arbitration matters globally, Burford combines financial strength with deep arbitral expertise across multiple jurisdictions. Its financing solutions are designed not only to fund proceedings but also to serve as strategic tools for businesses and law firms navigating increasingly complex international disputes.
If you’re interested in learning more about how arbitration finance from Burford could benefit you, learn more here.
