The arbitration solution for corporate disputes is based on Law No. 9,307/1996. Article 3 equates the arbitration award to a court judgment, while Article 31 grants it the force of a judicial enforceable title. Accordingly, the Superior Court of Justice (REsp 1,733,685/SP) recognized that the arbitration agreement derogates from state jurisdiction, with the Judiciary remaining only with the execution of the award or, in the strict cases of Article 32, the annulment action. 

Three dogmatic pillars explain the market's preference for this mechanism: 

1. Specialization— Articles 13 and 14 allow the selection of arbitrators with technical training in corporate law, accounting or finance, ensuring decisions that are in line with business reality. 
2. Speed— Article 21 guarantees procedural autonomy, eliminating the ordinary appeal system and drastically reducing processing time. 
3. Confidentiality— protected by art. 22C of the Arbitration Law and by art. 189, IV, of the CPC/2015, prevents the disclosure of sensitive information and the creation of unfavorable public precedents. 

The empirical study Retrospective 2024 (FGV) confirms these benefits: corporate arbitration proceedings lasted, on average, 16 months, while equivalent lawsuits exceeded five years only in the first instance. This time gain preserves economic value in M&A transactions, IPOs and in the day-to-day management of the company. 

Illustrative case 

In the call “Petrobras Funds case”, 92 funds (mostly foreign) filed a lawsuit with the Market Arbitration Chamber – CAM B3, seeking compensation for losses resulting from Operation Lava Jato. The report, issued after just over three years of secrecy, ruled out the responsibility of the Union and established objective criteria for compensation. If it were to proceed in court, the dispute would probably face multiple levels of appeal, increasing costs and volatility of the shares. 

Cost structure 

Although administrative fees and arbitrator fees exceed the initial costs of the state forum, the analysis of the full life cycle demonstrates savings. Joint report Migalhas/FGV (2025) found an average reduction of 34 % in the total cost of corporate disputes resolved by arbitration, mainly due to lower capital immobilization and the lack of resources. 

Escalated clauses (MedArb) 

Clauses that impose mandatory prior mediation enhance this gain. The case law of the STJ requires the exhaustion of the mediation stage provided for in the contract, under penalty of termination of the process (lack of procedural prerequisite). In 2024, an agricultural cooperative submitted a dispute of R$110 million to institutional mediation provided for in its bylaws; an agreement reached in the third session dispensed with the constitution of the arbitration court and saved more than R$90,% of the estimated cost for the full procedure. 

In short, corporate arbitration combines technical rigor, quick decision-making and reduction of overall costs, configuring itself as the natural forum for disputes in complex corporate structures.