International Arbitration 2026

SLOVENIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Vesna Cukrov and Veronika Cukrov, Law Firm Cukrov (Odvetniška družba Cukrov o.p., d.o.o.)

• Public policy: Slovenian courts construe public policy narrowly, and rightly so. However, an award whose entire legal foundation is fabricated engages the integrity of adjudication itself, which sits closer to the core of procedural public policy than most challenges ever come. The first two grounds must be pleaded and proved by the applicant; the third the court may consider of its own motion. That distinction matters in practice, because the evidential burden on a party alleging improper AI use is considerable and will rarely be dis - charged by inference alone. For foreign awards, Article 42 ZArbit applies the New York Convention directly, and the same analysis maps onto Article V(1)(b), V(1)(d) and V(2)(b). This carries commercial weight: a Slovenian company enforcing a foreign award here, or resisting a challenge to a Slo - venian award abroad, now faces a new category of objection. A caveat is warranted: so far as the firm is aware, there is no reported Slovenian decision on any of these questions. ARIHQ succeeded because the defect was flagrant and demonstrable. A challenge founded on a suspicion that the arbitrator “probably used ChatGPT” will fail, and should. Setting-aside proceedings are not an invitation to audit a tribunal’s drafting process. The institutional landscape in Slovenia is straightfor - ward. Most institutional arbitrations seated here are administered by the Ljubljana Arbitration Centre at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Slovenia. The risk least discussed: confidentiality and privilege General counsel asked about AI in arbitration usually mention hallucinations first, but the more immediate exposure lies in confidentiality. Confidentiality is one of the principal reasons busi - nesses choose arbitration, and that protection depends on the material remaining within a closed circle. Uploading a witness statement, a negotiating position or a privileged memorandum into a con - sumer-grade AI service can breach that circle with a single click, exposing the material to the provider, its

sub-processors and, on some configurations, model training. A more troublesome question follows: legal profes - sional privilege in most systems depends on confi - dentiality having been maintained. Where privileged material has been transmitted to a third-party system without adequate contractual and technical safe - guards, an opposing party may argue that privilege has been lost. There is no settled answer, which is precisely why the question merits attention now rather than after the event. The practical response is unglamorous but effective. • Use enterprise or closed-environment tools with contractual assurance that input data will not be used for model training; and verify that assurance rather than assuming it. • Prohibit the use of consumer AI services for any - thing arising from a live dispute, and record that prohibition expressly in the terms of engagement with external counsel and experts. • Ask external counsel directly which tools they use – and on what infrastructure – and where the data resides. • Put the same questions to technical experts and to quantum experts; the accountants and economists who calculate what the claim is actually worth. They receive the most sensitive material in the case, including financial models and internal cost - ings, and are the least frequently examined link in the chain. Data protection sits alongside this. Arbitration files routinely contain personal data, such as employment records, correspondence, and medical or financial information about individuals. Processing that mate - rial through an AI system constitutes processing under the General Data Protection Regulation, with the attendant obligations as to lawful basis, transpar -

ency and international transfers. The European regulatory layer

Businesses operating in Slovenia face an additional layer that users of arbitration in London, Singapore or New York do not.

875 CHAMBERS.COM

Powered by