10 years of arbitration under the Dutch Arbitration Act of 2015: more efficiency, less set-aside

In a recent Lexology article published by Enhance Arbitration, Professor Bas van Zelst reviews ten years of arbitration practice under the Dutch Arbitration Act 2015 (DAA 2015) and assesses whether the Dutch legislature’s ambitions have been realized. His analysis draws on empirical research published in the Journal of International Arbitration, examining how the 2015 reforms have shifted the landscape of arbitral awards and set-aside proceedings in The Netherlands.

Professor van Zelst situates the Netherlands as a longstanding centre of international commercial and maritime arbitration, supported by institutions such as the Permanent Court of Arbitration and a robust legal framework that accommodates international trade and transport disputes. The DAA 2015 was designed to modernize arbitral practice, enhance procedural clarity, limit unnecessary court intervention, and strengthen party autonomy — all with the objective of making Dutch-seated arbitration more efficient and less vulnerable to annulment challenges.

A central message in van Zelst’s work is that the DAA 2015 has substantially reduced successful set-aside applications compared with its predecessor. The empirical data show a marked drop — from roughly 23% of awards set aside under the 1986 Act to approximately 6.8% under the 2015 regime — and an increased use of tools such as remission to the arbitral tribunal to rectify defects rather than annul awards outright.

For maritime arbitration — where enforceability and certainty of awards are paramount — van Zelst’s analysis is relevant where it highlights how the DAA 2015’s procedural innovations and focus on resolving formal deficiencies pragmatically contribute to a more stable arbitral framework. Dutch courts are shown to assess annulment claims swiftly and with careful attention to substantive case circumstances, but not bound by precedent, emphasizing case-specific justice rather than rigid templates.

Van Zelst’s overarching vision underscores that efficiency, party autonomy, and limited set-aside risk are not abstract ideals but concrete outcomes under the DAA 2015 — qualities that resonate deeply in international commercial and transport arbitration.
This is directly relevant for UNUM Transport Arbitration & Mediation and its users, as it confirms that the Netherlands offers a legal framework in which arbitration awards are respected, vulnerable to fewer set-aside risks, and supported by an efficient judicial practice. It reinforces confidence that choosing the Netherlands as a seat of arbitration contributes to procedural certainty and a strong likelihood that awards will stand.