AUSTRIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Florian Haugeneder, Patrizia Netal, Jurgita Petkutė and Natascha Tunkel, KNOETZL
to, upon request of a party, issue anti-suit injunctions directed against arbitration proceedings. These anti- arbitration injunctions have already been frequently requested by Russian parties and have been granted by Russian courts. The response has been twofold. On the one hand, arbitral proceedings with Russian parties now increas - ingly involve interim measures and countermeasures, and the locating and securing of assets has become more prevalent. On the other hand, the EU has, in its 15th sanctions package, adopted countermeasures and introduced a prohibition on the recognition or enforcement in the EU of injunctions, orders, judg - ments or other court decisions pursuant to or in rela - tion to the Lugovoy Law or equivalent Russian legisla - tion. The EU’s 20th sanctions package strengthened this framework further, enabling court orders to uphold arbitration clauses and halt conflicting Russian pro - ceedings. It also permits, subject to authorisation, the release of frozen assets to satisfy cost awards in favour of non-sanctioned parties. Procedural Trends II: Rise of Competition Law Disputes Competition-law issues often arise as defences in contractual disputes, especially where pricing, exclu - sivity, licensing, termination of rights or other con - tract terms are alleged to breach Article 101 or 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). These issues are particularly relevant in regu - lated or concentrated sectors such as energy, life sci - ences and technology. Beyond defences, competition law is also becoming more important as a basis for claims, including both follow-on and stand-alone pri - vate enforcement actions. This reflects the broader rise of private competition-law enforcement in Europe in the last decade. Arbitration is a particularly suitable forum for these disputes because it allows parties to appoint specialist tribunals, adapt the procedure to complex economic fact-finding, and preserve confi - dentiality where appropriate. Moreover, competition law is reshaping professional sport and sport arbitration. Recent European Court of Justice rulings have clarified that sports associa - tions may be subject to Articles 101 and 102 TFEU when their regulatory powers affect economic activity.
However, this does not undermine sports arbitration but rather recalibrates it: arbitration remains impor - tant in sports disputes yet must operate within the boundaries of EU competition law (see, eg, C-124/21 P and C-600/23). Procedural Trends III: Increase of Insolvency- Related Arbitrations The development of the field of insolvency-related arbitrations builds upon a 2018 decision of the Aus - trian Supreme Court which confirmed that claim veri - fication proceedings do not fall within the exclusive competence of the (insolvency) courts but can be conducted before arbitral tribunals provided the arbi - tration proceedings were already pending at the time of the opening of the insolvency proceedings. These two factors combined have recently led to a cascade of arbitration proceedings that deal with the effects of insolvency. A significant case is the insol - vency of Signa Holding and affiliated companies, the largest insolvency in Austrian history, with debts of over EUR14 billion affecting not only Austria but also large-scale projects in Germany and Switzerland. Technical Trends: VIAC Legal Tech Think Tank and Note on the Use of AI in Arbitration Proceedings The topic of artificial intelligence (AI) has become more and more prevalent. In 2024, the Vienna International Arbitral Centre (VIAC), one of the leading European arbitral institutions, launched its Legal Tech Think Tank (VIAC LTTT). The VIAC LTTT aims to identify technol - ogy-related disputes that are suitable for arbitration. It has also reviewed the Vienna Rules with a view to the needs of parties in technology-related disputes. Currently, the VIAC LTTT is analysing the impact of AI on transparency and disclosure obligations in arbi - tration proceedings as well as the opportunities and risks arising from the use of AI in the collection and evaluation of evidence. In April 2025, the VIAC LTTT issued a Note on the Use of AI in Arbitration Proceedings. The Note intends to facilitate discussions related to the use of AI in the context of VIAC arbitration proceedings. The appli - cation of the Note should be tailored to the specific requirements of the case. The goal is to ensure that the use of any AI tool enhances efficiency or effectiveness
48 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook