NAI arbitration is arbitration under the rules of the Netherlands Arbitration Institute, established in 1949 and based in Rotterdam. At Musch Legal, we frequently work with NAI for Dutch-language and Dutch-law-oriented commercial disputes. NAI offers good value for money: lower costs than ICC or LCIA with experienced Dutch arbitrators. Often the ideal choice for medium-sized international disputes with a Dutch connection.

What is the legal problem? (When is NAI appropriate?)

NAI is well-suited for disputes under Dutch law involving Dutch or international parties. For purely domestic Dutch matters, NAI can be an alternative to the courts due to confidentiality and specialized arbitrators. For medium-sized international disputes with a Dutch connection, NAI offers lower costs than ICC or LCIA. For very large international deals, ICC is often preferred due to its worldwide reputation.

What does the law say? (Which rules apply in NAI?)

NAI Arbitration Rules 2024 (effective January 1, 2024) govern the procedure. Article 6 of the NAI Rules governs confidentiality. Article 35 governs the emergency arbitrator. Under Dutch law, Articles 1020-1076 of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure apply additionally for arbitrations with their seat in the Netherlands. For the annulment of judgments, Article 1065 of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure applies (limited grounds). New York Convention 1958 for worldwide enforceability in 170+ countries.

For international trade disputes, the NAI is a contracting state of various international standards.

Element

NAI

ICC

LCIA

Location

Rotterdam

Paris

London

Standard processing time

12-18 months

18-24 months

12-18 months

Costs 1M EUR case

50,000-150,000 EUR

100,000-250,000 EUR

100,000-200,000 EUR

Scrutiny judgment

No

Yes

No

Main language

Dutch/English

French/English

English

Element

NAI

ICC

LCIA

Location

Rotterdam

Paris

London

Standard processing time

12-18 months

18-24 months

12-18 months

Costs 1M EUR case

50,000-150,000 EUR

100,000-250,000 EUR

100,000-200,000 EUR

Scrutiny judgment

No

Yes

No

Main language

Dutch/English

French/English

English

What risks do companies face? (What goes wrong with choosing NAI?)

For matters without a Dutch connection, NAI may seem less logical to the international counterparty. It does not have a globally recognized reputation like the ICC or LCIA — sometimes an obstacle during contract negotiations with a large multinational counterparty. However, for matters governed by Dutch law and involving a Dutch party, it is a very good choice. Incorrect clause wording can lead to interpretation problems regarding the version of the rules and the seat.

Practical example from our practice (What did choosing NAI yield?)

Musch Legal represented a Dutch SME in NAI arbitration against a German partner valued at 1.4 million euros. We chose NAI due to Dutch law and cost efficiency. The proceedings lasted 14 months and cost 95,000 euros including the arbitrator (compare: the ICC would have cost approximately 220,000 euros for the same case). The final decision yielded 1.1 million euros plus an order for costs. Enforceable in Germany under the New York Convention within two weeks.

What can you do? (How do you formulate an NAI clause?)

Use NAI model clause: 'All disputes arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be finally settled in accordance with the Rules of Arbitration of the Netherlands Arbitration Institute.' Add: number of arbitrators (1 or 3), seat (often Amsterdam, Rotterdam or The Hague), language (Dutch or English), choice of law. For medium-sized disputes: consider expedited proceedings. Engage Musch Legal for clause optimization.

ICC arbitration explained

Arbitration or court?

Forum selection clauses in practice