Austria

1.1 Advantages

• The Austrian lex arbitri (sections 577 et seq., Austrian Code of Civil Procedure (CCP)) is mainly non-mandatory, focusing on party autonomy.
• Arbitration-friendly jurisdiction with a continual pro-arbitration approach.
• A single-instance “one-stop shop” for setting-aside proceedings before a specialised chamber at the Austrian Supreme Court (OGH), ensuring speed and consistency.
• Neutral seat with enforcement mechanisms under the New York Convention.
• Vienna International Arbitral Centre (VIAC): Experienced institutional administration tailored to the participants’ needs in a cost-effective manner.
• Vienna is geographically well positioned and hosts a highly experienced arbitration community.

1.2 Disadvantages and common pitfalls

• Consumer and employment arbitration are subject to rather strict statutory requirements and are, in practice, rarely viable. However, thanks to current political endeavours, a shift is under way.
• As a matter of law, insolvency proceedings interrupt arbitration proceedings relating to the insolvency estate.
• Confidentiality is not automatically applicable under Austrian law and must be contractually agreed. While the Vienna Rules contain provisions binding the arbitral institution and arbitrators to confidentiality, they do not bind the parties.

1.3 Distinctive features

• The Austrian lex arbitri does not, in general, distinguish between domestic and international arbitration as its provisions apply regardless.
• “One-stop-shop” competence with setting-aside proceedings in front of the Austrian Supreme Court, which has a specialised chamber. The Austrian Supreme Court usually decides such cases very quickly, that is, within six to eight months.
• Competent state courts that support arbitrators, such as, with compelling witness testimonies, executing interim measures, or ordering security for costs, amongst others.
• Austria is geographically well positioned as a neutral country, which might also be of particular interest for states or state-owned entities in commercial as well as investment disputes.
• VIAC: an experienced international arbitral centre that administers arbitration and mediation cases in a cost-effective manner, tailored to the participants’ needs. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) also has a regional office in Vienna.

2.1 Legal framework

• Sections 577–618 of the CCP. Party autonomy is central: besides or instead of relevant provisions of Austrian lex arbitri, proceedings may be governed by ad hoc rules, institutional rules (e.g. VIAC), and/or party agreements.
• Relevant treaties are, for example, the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention from 1958), the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration of 1961, or the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convention from 1965).
• There are no specialised arbitration courts. Since 2013, setting-aside proceedings are generally heard exclusively by the Austrian Supreme Court, except for consumer and certain labour disputes, where a three-tiered system applies.

2.2 What qualifies under domestic law as “international arbitration”? Is there a specific statute?

Austrian arbitration law does not distinguish between domestic and international arbitration.

2.3 Ratification of the New York Convention

In force since 31 July 1961.

2.4 Ratification of the ICSID Convention

In force since 24 June 1971.

2.5 Other treaties relating to arbitration

• Convention on the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1927
• European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration of 1961 in force since 4 June 1964 (“European Convention”).
• The International Energy Charter in force since 16 April 1988.

2.6 Choice of forum for intra-EU dispute settlement

As arbitration is excluded from the scope of the Brussels I Regulation, parties are, in general, not bound by EU law in their choice of forum.

2.7 Is the municipal law governing arbitration based on UNCITRAL Model Law?

Yes, sections 577 et seq. of the CCP are based on the UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) Model Law 1985, albeit with certain Austrian-specific adaptations (i.e. no differentiation between domestic and international arbitration).

2.8 Recent amendments or reforms in arbitration laws

Comprehensive reforms were implemented in 2006 and 2013. Certain provisions such as the consumer arbitration provisions (notably section 617, CCP) are considered in need of some reform and have been earmarked by the Austrian government in their current government programme as a priority. Matters addressed in this programme aim to strengthen Austria’s competitiveness as a seat of arbitration by eliminating legal uncertainties in the current arbitration framework. The objective is to align Austrian arbitration law more closely with international best practices and enhance legal certainty for commercial parties. This would ensure that Austria remains an attractive and reliable forum for high-quality international dispute resolution.

3.1 Presence of local arbitration institutions

• VIAC administers national as well as international cases, mainly commercial arbitration cases but also boasts investment arbitration rules and mediation rules. VIAC’s updated rules entered into force on 1 January 2025: viac.eu/viac-rules-of-arbitration-and-mediation-2021-online-version/ to include supplementary rules for corporate disputes as well as modernised mediation clauses. The previous amendment of the rules took place in 2021 to add a new set of rules on investment arbitration and mediation as well as provisions such as third-party funding. VIAC’s modern rules also grant it the possibility to act as an administering and appointing authority. In addition, VIAC offers its users practice notes on the use of AI (put together by its Legal Tech Think Tank) or on sanctions, which are available on its website.
• China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission – European Arbitration Centre (CIETAC Europe) is a European liaison and service centre, not a formal regional office.

3.2 Does the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) have a local office?

No, LCIA does not have a local office in Austria.

3.3 Does the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) have a local office?

Yes, the PCA set up a regional office in April 2022 in Vienna.

3.4 Does the ICC International Court of Arbitration have a local office?

The ICC International Court of Arbitration does not have a local office in Austria that administers cases. However, there is a small team at ICC Austria that advises enterprises, banks, lawyers, and traders in their daily international business.

3.5 Does the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) have a local office?

No, the ICDR does not have a local office in Vienna.

3.6 Agreement entered into with local offices of international arbitration institutions

Agreement of the Austrian Federal Government and the Permanent Court of Arbitration on the Legal Status of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in Austria was published in the Austrian Federal Law Gazette on 27 April 2023.

4.1 Requirements as to content and form

Arbitration agreements must be in writing (section 583, CCP):

• This requirement is interpreted broadly and includes electronic communications, for example, as part of a document signed by the parties or as an exchange of letters, telefax, emails or any other means of communication that provides a record of the arbitration agreement.
• The above also applies to testamentary dispositions and articles of association or incorporation. Incorporation by reference is permitted.
• The Austrian Supreme Court has clarified that it is not necessary for “exchanged documents” to be signed, regardless of the means of communication used (OGH 23.06.2015, 18 OCg 1/15v).

4.2 Validity of arbitration agreements

An arbitration agreement’s validity depends on:

• The legal capacity of the parties.
• Arbitrability of the dispute.
• Compliance with mandatory rules such as those protecting consumers and employees.

4.3 Special formalities

No special formalities apply, except for consumer and employment arbitration, where mandatory requirements exist (sections 617 et seq., CCP).

4.4 Governing law

The provisions of the Austrian CCP apply to an arbitration agreement if the place of arbitration is within Austria. However, if one of the parties has their seat, domicile or ordinary residence in Austria, particular provisions under the CCP (e.g. referring to the form of arbitration agreements or the jurisdiction of Austrian courts in relation to interim measures or judicial assistance) apply if the place of arbitration has not yet been determined. Thus, the choice of seat can be considered as both relevant and determinative, depending on the case (section 577, paragraphs 2 and 3, CCP).

The law governing the arbitration agreement does not depend on the general choice-of-law clause in the underlying contract.

5.1 Applicable restrictions (if any)

• In general, all pecuniary claims are arbitrable. Non-pecuniary claims are still arbitrable if the law allows the dispute to be settled by the parties (section 582, paragraph 1, CCP). However, family law matters, tenancy matters or those resulting from or in connection with condominium property are not arbitrable.
• Additional exceptions apply, particularly with respect to criminal law and certain insolvency law matters.
• While consumer and employment disputes are formally arbitrable, they are subject to extremely strict requirements (e.g. arbitration agreements may only be validly concluded after a dispute has already arisen, see sections 617 et seq., CCP).

6.1 Stay of proceedings

Courts must decline jurisdiction if the respondent invokes a valid arbitration agreement no later than its first submission on the merits (section 584, CCP).

6.2 Anti-suit injunctions

Austrian courts do not issue anti-suit injunctions.

7.1 Restrictions on the parties’ freedom to choose arbitrators

Austrian law does not impose any restrictions on the parties’ freedom to choose arbitrators. Austrian arbitration law imposes only two notable limitations: arbitral tribunals may not be constituted with an even number of arbitrators, and incumbent Austrian judges are legally barred from serving as arbitrators.

7.2 Requirement of arbitrator independence and impartiality

Mandatory rules of the Austrian lex arbitri include that arbitrators must be, and remain, impartial and independent. They must disclose any circumstances giving rise to doubts about their impartiality or independence; hence Austrian law is rather strict in these matters (section 588, CCP). The obligation to disclose such circumstances remains throughout the entire arbitral proceeding.

7.3 Mandatory rules applicable to the appointment process

There are no mandatory rules applicable to the appointment process itself, except for those mentioned in Section 7.1, above.

7.4 Appointment mechanism in the absence of party agreement or applicable institutional rules

In the absence of party agreement, the CCP provides rules on the appointment of arbitrators according to section 587, paragraph 2; that is, by state courts. If the parties have not agreed on a procedure for appointing the arbitrators, the default mechanism provides that a sole arbitrator is to be appointed jointly by the parties, whereas in the case of a three‑member tribunal each party appoints one arbitrator and the two party‑appointed arbitrators then select the presiding arbitrator. If a party fails to make its appointment, or if the parties cannot reach agreement on the appointment of a sole arbitrator or the presiding arbitrator, or in situations involving multiple parties, any party may request the Austrian Supreme Court to make the appointment.

7.5 Mandatory rules applicable to the replacement process

The appointment shall be carried out in accordance with the rules that were applicable to the appointment of the arbitrator who is being replaced (section 591, CCP).

7.6 Mandatory disclosure obligations

Arbitrators must disclose any circumstances giving rise to doubts as to independence or impartiality under section 588 of the CCP.

7.7 Grounds for challenge

According to section 588 of the CCP:

• lack of independence or impartiality;
• failure to meet agreed qualifications.

7.8 Mandatory rules governing the challenge of arbitrators

The parties are free to agree on a procedure for challenging an arbitrator (section 589, paragraph 1, CCP).

7.9 Removal

An arbitrator may be removed according to a decision by a state court (section 589, paragraph 3, CCP).

7.10 Liability and immunity of arbitrators

Austrian law does not provide arbitrators with immunity. According to section 594(4) of the CCP, an arbitrator who fails to fulfil their duties at all or in a timely manner is liable to the parties for damages caused by their culpable refusal or delay.

However, this liability is limited to culpable misconduct, and no liability arises for errors of judgment. Mostly arbitrators are also a member of a bar and have entered into a respective insurance agreement.

8.1 Interim measures

8.1.1 Overview of interim measures

Arbitral tribunals may order interim measures (section 593, paragraph 1, CCP). Austrian courts are obliged under section 593, paragraph 3 of the CCP to enforce such interim measures unless limited statutory grounds for refusal apply.

Before or during an arbitral proceeding, it is further permissible for a party to request interim or protective measures from a court and for a court to grant such measures (section 585, CCP).

8.1.2 Relevance of availability of emergency arbitrator mechanism

As Austrian law supports the enforcement of interim measures rendered by arbitrators (section 593, CCP), emergency arbitrator mechanisms are not as relevant as in other jurisdictions.

8.2 Taking of evidence

Courts may assist in the taking of evidence, that is, when the arbitral tribunal is not authorised to do so: for example, summon witnesses, compelling witness testimony, hearing witnesses under oath, enforcing interim measures or security of costs, and requesting foreign courts and authorities to conduct such measures (section 602, CCP).

8.3 Appointment or challenge of arbitrators

Courts may decide on the appointment or challenge of arbitrators according to sections 587 and 589 of the CCP.

8.4 Other available assistance

No other types of assistance to arbitration are commonly available.

9.1 Domestic scope of sovereign immunity from jurisdiction

The CCP itself does not state specific rules on state or diplomatic immunity. This issue is governed by public international law and separate statutory instruments.

9.2 Immunity from execution

The chapter on arbitration within the CCP does not state any specific provisions on immunity from executions.

• Parties must be treated fairly and granted a full right to be heard (section 594, paragraph 2, CCP).
• Hearings:
  • May be held anywhere, irrespective of the seat (section 595, paragraph 2, CCP).
  • May be conducted in person or virtually, unless parties agree otherwise.
  • Must be held if requested by a party, unless expressly excluded (section 598, CCP).
• Written-only proceedings are permissible (section 598, CCP).
• Non-participation by a party does not prevent continuation of proceedings (section 600, CCP).

In the context of virtual hearings, the Austrian Supreme Court’s decision of 23 July 2020 (18 ONc 3/20s) is noteworthy. In that case, the Austrian Supreme Court confirmed the permissibility of virtual hearings, which attracted worldwide attention within the international arbitration community as it was the first decision on this matter at the outset of COVID.

There are no statutory provisions under the Austrian lex arbitri implementing confidentiality; it must be contractually agreed. While the Vienna Rules contain provisions binding the arbitral institution and arbitrators to confidentiality, they do not bind the parties.

12.1 Requirements as to content and form

Under section 606 of the CCP, awards must:

• be in writing;
• be signed (majority signature is sufficient in multi-member tribunals);
• state the date of issuance and seat of arbitration; and
• be reasoned (unless parties agree otherwise).

Each party must receive a signed copy (section 606, paragraph 4, CCP).

12.2 Time limit

The law of Austria does not impose a time limit for rendering an award.

12.3 Remedies

Arbitrators may grant any remedies permissible under substantive law, including declaratory relief, damages, and specific performance (subject to Austrian ordre public).

13.1 Interpretation and correction of awards

According to section 610 of the CCP, a party may request within four weeks of receipt of the award:

• a correction of clerical, calculation, or printing errors (or similar errors);
• an explanation of specific parts (if agreed so by the parties); or
• a supplementary award on undecided claims.

The arbitral tribunal may also correct the award regarding clerical, calculation, printing (or similar) errors on its own initiative within four weeks from the date of the award (section 610, paragraph 4, CCP).

13.2 Challenge of an award

• Setting aside must be sought within three months of receipt of the award (section 611, CCP).
• Proceedings are generally one-tiered before the Austrian Supreme Court (except for consumer and certain labour law cases).

13.3 Recognition and enforcement proceedings

Governed primarily by the New York Convention, see Section 14, below.

13.4 Cost of enforcement

It depends on the amount in dispute.

13.5 Enforcement of orders of emergency arbitrators

Generally enforceable, see Section 8.1.2, above.

14.1 Process for enforcing New York Convention awards

Austria does not apply the New York Convention based on reciprocity. Initially, the Convention entered into force in Austria in 1961 on the basis of reciprocity. However, this approach was withdrawn in 1988.

14.2 Grounds for resisting enforcement of New York Convention awards

There is extensive case law regarding the grounds for setting aside an arbitral award under the New York Convention (NYC). The Austrian Supreme Court has affirmed that, once such a ground is established, refusal is mandatory and does not retain discretion. According to case law, Article V(1)(d) of the NYC in particular is rarely invoked successfully. Another setting-aside ground often invoked but rarely successful is Article V(2)(b) of the NYC: violation of public policy:

• The principle of ordre public is to be applied only where enforcement of the foreign award would be wholly incompatible with the domestic legal order.
• It must not result in a substantive review of the foreign award, whether on factual or legal grounds.
• Rather, the alleged violation must concern fundamental values of the Austrian legal system. These include, in particular, the core principles of Austrian constitutional law, criminal law, private law, procedural law, and public law.

14.3 Enforcing non-Convention awards

Non-Convention awards are enforced in Austria according to other applicable treaties (i.e. EU Convention, Geneva Convention) or domestic law.

15.1 Applicable to counsel

Professional conduct rules of the relevant bar apply:

• Austria has no arbitration-specific ethical rules governing the conduct of arbitrators.
• The Austrian rules of conduct for attorneys apply to all members of the Austrian Bar.
• These rules apply irrespective of whether a lawyer acts as party counsel or as an arbitrator.

15.2 Applicable to arbitrators

See above.

16.1 Applicable regulatory requirements

• Austria has no statutory regime governing third-party litigation funding.
• It is permissible under Austrian law, as the Austrian Supreme Court has expressly confirmed in several decisions (e.g. OGH 15.12.2021, 18 OCg 5/21s).
• In practice, conflicts may arise where:
  • an arbitrator acts as counsel in another case funded by the same funder; or
  • the arbitrator’s law firm has ongoing relationships with a particular funder.
• Adequate disclosure is therefore required to safeguard arbitrator independence and impartiality, particularly in ad hoc proceedings (see section, 588 paragraph 1, CCP).
• The International Bar Association (IBA) Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration address disclosure obligations where a third-party funder is involved and are regularly referred to by the Austrian Supreme Court and respective arbitral doctrine.

16.2 Overview of the third-party funding market

• Third-party funding is well established and generally accepted in Austria.
• The market operates in a permissive legal environment under case law of the Austrian Supreme Court.
• There is no dedicated regulatory framework. In most cases respective disclosure provisions refer to applicable institutional rules or soft law.

17.1 Types of specialist arbitration

Austria is not regarded as a specialist seat for a particular arbitration sector. However, as VIAC is the leading arbitral institution in the Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and Southeast Europe (SEE) regions and 94% of proceedings administered by VIAC refer to Vienna being the seat of arbitration, Austria’s specialisation is rather geographic than tied to a specific sector of disputes. This is demonstrated by VIAC’s caseload, which covers a range of sectors including (but not limited to) aerospace and defence, construction and infrastructure, digital services, and intellectual property.

In addition, the Energy Community Secretariat established its seat in Vienna in 2007. According to its Work Programme, it has been supporting the contracting parties to align the region with the Energy Community acquis, integrating it into EU energy and climate policies. Thus, the energy sector may also be regarded as one of Austria’s areas of speciality.

17.2 Key legal principles

Not applicable.

17.3 Types of claim and defences typically brought in that area

Not applicable.

17.4 Issues and strategic considerations to take note of

Not applicable.

• Increased focus on digitalisation and AI in arbitration.
• Impact of sanctions against Russia on arbitration proceedings.
• Increase of insolvency-related arbitration.