Ciarb is committed to the highest standards of transparency, probity, integrity and accountability in all that it does. However, wrongdoing can occur. A culture of openness and accountability is essential to prevent such situations occurring and to address them when they do occur.

This policy clarifies the how a candidate may and may not utilise artificial intelligence (AI) tools, in Ciarb Education and Training assessments.

This policy applies to Education and Training assessment candidates taking written assessments.

For the purpose of this policy the definitions given in Ciarb Guideline on the Use of AI in Arbitration (2025) for AI tool, Gen AI tool and AI are adopted and used in a generic sense to incorporate any a tool or platform which relies on, incorporates, or utilises some form of AI.

In the drafting of Ciarb Education and training assessments candidates are permitted to use AI tools only for supportive purposes that do not replace the reasoning, judgment, or drafting that is being assessed. Acceptable uses include:

• Clarifying definitions of general arbitration or legal terminology.
• Proofreading for grammar, spelling, formatting, or stylistic consistency.
• Generating checklists for generic award structures (without content).
• Researching general background on arbitration concepts or procedural rules (which must then be critically assessed and independently applied).

Candidates may not use AI for any activity that substitutes the independent analysis and drafting being assessed, including:

• Drafting any part of the arbitral award (procedural history, factual summary, issues, analysis, reasoning, dispositive section, or costs/interest).
• Drafting any part of a mediation opening statement
• Identifying or weighing issues in dispute.
• Analysing evidence or applying law to the facts.
• Determining jurisdiction, applicable law, or outcome of the dispute.
• Producing sample awards, partial awards, or model reasoning.

The education and training team must ensure that where applicable each candidate has signed the AI self-declaration. The education and training team may use additional tools for highlighting AI misuse. Ciarb faculty must apply this policy when advising students and when marking assessments.

Any breach of this policy may constitute academic misconduct under Ciarb regulations as set out in the Candidate Terms and Conditions.

Exceptions to this policy will be clearly stated in course, assessment and candidate information. This self-declaration included in this policy does not apply to candidates undertaking a multiple choice assessment.

• Ciarb candidate terms and conditions

Candidate declaration

a. AI Use Declaration for the International Arbitration Award Writing Assessment.

I, the candidate declare that by submitting this assessment, I affirm and attest that the following AI processes have been used in the preparation of my submission (check all that apply):

☐ Clarifying definitions of general arbitration or legal terminology.
☐ Proofreading for grammar, spelling, formatting, or stylistic consistency.
☐ Generating checklists or templates for generic award structure (without substantive content).

☐ Researching general background on arbitration concepts or procedural rules (independently evaluated and applied by me).
☐ Other.

I further affirm that AI has not been used in any of the following:

• Drafting any substantive part of the arbitral award (procedural history, facts, issues, analysis, reasoning, dispositive section, or costs/interest).
• Identifying or weighing issues in dispute.
• Analysing evidence or applying law to the facts of the case scenario.
• Determining jurisdiction, applicable law, or outcome of the dispute.
• Producing a sample award, partial award, or model reasoning.
• Any task that may risk disclosure of confidential assessment materials to AI tools.
• Any task that would contravene applicable rules of academic integrity or professional conduct.

I understand that:

• I remain fully responsible and accountable for the quality, integrity, and accuracy of the Award I submit.
• The Award must represent my own independent reasoning, judgment, and drafting.
• Any breach of this declaration may constitute academic misconduct under Ciarb regulations as set out in the Candidate Terms and Conditions.
• I may be contacted by the Education Training Department and asked to provide clarification on the extent of AI use in my submission.