Arbitrations in Brazil: What Do Numbers Really Say?

Key Takeaways

• New cases up 30% to 376 annually
• Average dispute value jumped 122% to BRL 202M
• Expert‑appointed arbitrations take 49 months, double duration
• Arbitrator challenges rose to 71, 20% of cases
• Women now 57% of tribunal chairs

Summary

The 2025 edition of Selma Lemes’s arbitration report shows Brazil’s arbitral market rebounding, with new cases rising 30% to 376 annually and the average dispute value jumping 122% to BRL 202 million in 2024. International filings also climbed to 64, the highest since 2019, driven mainly by CAM‑MERCADO, CAM‑CCBC and the ICC. However, proceedings involving tribunal‑appointed experts now average 49 months, nearly double those without expert evidence, while arbitrator challenges have surged to 71 cases, representing about 20% of filings. At the same time, gender diversity reached new heights, with women holding 57% of tribunal chairs.

Pulse Analysis

Brazil’s arbitration resurgence reflects a broader shift toward Latin America as a viable venue for high‑stakes disputes. The 2025 Lemes report documents a 30% increase in new filings, bringing Brazil’s caseload on par with global hubs such as DIAC, LCIA and HKIAC. Judicial pronouncements from the Superior Court of Justice have reinforced pro‑arbitration norms, encouraging parties to seat complex, cross‑border matters domestically. Institutions like CAM‑MERCADO and CAM‑CCBC now dominate the high‑value segment, underscoring the market’s maturation and its appeal to multinational corporations seeking a credible, cost‑effective forum.

Despite the optimism, procedural inefficiencies threaten to blunt Brazil’s competitive edge. Arbitrations that rely on tribunal‑appointed experts stretch to an average of 49 months, driven by a ten‑month expert‑report preparation phase and subsequent procedural wrangling. This delay inflates legal costs and contributes to a growing backlog, as pending cases outpace new filings. Practitioners are urging a recalibration toward party‑appointed experts and streamlined evidentiary protocols, which could restore the speed and cost advantages traditionally associated with arbitration.

The surge in arbitrator challenges—71 objections in 2024, a 20% challenge rate—highlights another friction point, suggesting tactical use of challenges rather than substantive conflict concerns. Simultaneously, Brazil’s gender‑diversity metrics have improved markedly, with women now comprising 57% of tribunal chairs, surpassing global benchmarks. This progress enhances the jurisdiction’s legitimacy and aligns it with international ESG expectations. Balancing these strengths against procedural hurdles will determine whether Brazil consolidates its status as a premier arbitration seat or risks losing momentum in a competitive global landscape.