WIPO Caseload Summary

The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center has administered some 1,350 mediation, arbitration and expert determination (together, WIPO ADR) cases. As the table covering the period 2013-2023 shows, most of these cases were filed in recent years.

WIPO ADR cases were predominately based on contract clauses; however, some cases were submitted to WIPO ADR as a result of a submission agreement concluded after the dispute had arisen (some of these following WIPO Good Offices as described below, including disputes pending before national courts).

Some 30% of the mediation, arbitration and expedited arbitration cases filed with the WIPO Center included an escalation clause providing for WIPO mediation followed, in the absence of a settlement, by WIPO arbitration or expedited arbitration.

In addition, the WIPO Center regularly provides procedural guidance to parties in order to facilitate their direct settlement, or the submission of their existing dispute to WIPO ADR.

The WIPO Center has assisted parties in over 850 "Good Offices" requests (some of these are followed by WIPO ADR proceedings) based in different jurisdictions from all regions of the world.

WIPO ADR cases usually arise in the context of the following types of disputes:

• licensing agreements (e.g., trademarks, patents, copyright, software)
• research and development agreements
• technology transfer agreements
• distribution agreements, franchising agreements
• Information Technology agreements

• data processing agreements
• joint venture agreements
• consultancy agreements
• art marketing agreements
• digital copyright
• TV distribution and formats
• film production
• copyright collective management
• cases arising out of agreements in settlement of prior court litigation

Parties

Parties to WIPO ADR cases include large-sized companies, SMEs and startups across industries and sectors, artists and inventors, R&D centers, universities, producers and collecting societies.

Parties to WIPO ADR cases so far were based in different jurisdictions, including: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Belize, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Republic of Korea, Latvia, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Türkiye, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam and Zambia.

Case Examples

The WIPO Center makes available a number of anonymized mediation and arbitration case examples.

Venue and Languages

Venues of WIPO ADR proceedings have included: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Mexico, Netherlands, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom and United States of America.

WIPO ADR proceedings have been conducted in several languages, such as: Chinese, English, French, German, Greek, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, Slovenian and Spanish.

Remedies

Amounts in dispute in WIPO ADR cases have varied from USD 15,000 to 1 billion.

The remedies claimed in WIPO mediation and arbitration proceedings have included: damages, infringement declarations and specific performance, such as a declaration of non-performance of contractual obligations, or of infringement of rights, further safeguards for the preservation of confidentiality of evidence, the provision of a security, the production of data, the delivery of goods and the conclusion of new contracts (including determination of licensing terms).

Settlement Rates

WIPO ADR procedures seek to create positive opportunities for party settlement. To date, 70% of WIPO mediation and 33% of WIPO arbitration cases have concluded in a settlement between the parties.

WIPO Center has administered over 60,000 cases under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) and related policies. Together, these proceedings have involved parties from 185 countries and over 110,000 Internet domain names. The WIPO Center provides a full range of statistics concerning WIPO domain name cases (e.g., case outcomes and languages, complainant industries, and geographical distribution of parties) on its website. Impact of Changes to Availability of WhoIs Data on the UDRP and the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition are also available online.

The UDRP applies primarily to international domains such as .com, .net, .org, .top, .win and .xyz. In addition, over 80 country code top-level domains (ccTLDs) have appointed the WIPO Center as service provider for managing domain name disputes in their respective ccTLD. The WIPO Center has published a Guide to WIPO’s services for country code top-level domain registries.