How Kleros Enterprise Works
This page covers the standard process for private sector implementations, the ruleset evaluators apply, who the evaluators are, and the procedural guarantees built into every case.The Dispute Resolution Process
Outcome
Timing
All cases, their progress, and individual evaluator votes with reasoning are publicly visible on the Kleros platform.
The Dispute Policy
The Dispute Policy is the ruleset agreed between the organization and Kleros before any case is submitted. It defines how each type of case should be resolved and incorporates the applicable law for the jurisdiction and dispute type. In consumer disputes between an Argentine company and its Argentine users, for example, the Dispute Policy instructs evaluators to apply consumer protection law and other applicable regulations. In insurance disputes, it references the relevant policy terms and regulatory standards. The Dispute Policy means evaluators do not make subjective or arbitrary decisions: every ruling is grounded in pre-agreed, auditable rules.How it is created
How evaluators use it
Evaluators receive three inputs for each case and apply the Dispute Policy to the arguments and evidence of both sides:Examples by sector
- Fintech and consumer disputes: the policy references Argentine consumer protection law and the company’s terms of service. Evaluators assess whether the company acted within its published terms and whether the consumer’s legal rights were respected.
- Insurance: the policy references the insurance policy terms and conditions. The question for evaluators is: given the evidence and the policy terms, should the claim be paid?
- Municipal and public sector: the policy references the applicable consumer protection legislation (for example, Argentina’s Ley de Defensa del Consumidor) and any local regulations.
Who Evaluates the Cases
Evaluators are independent. They do not represent Kleros, the organization or the claimant. They are selected and verified before they can take part, and their compensation is tied to performing their role correctly.Evaluators are called jurors in other Kleros materials. It is the same role.
Selection criteria
Criteria are defined together with the organization during onboarding and can include:
The platform verifies evaluators against these criteria before they can take any case. The organization does not interact with evaluators directly: the Kleros protocol governs the evaluator pool.
How they are chosen for each case
Evaluators are selected at random from the qualified pool for each case. The number of evaluators per case (1, 3, 5, 7 or more) is agreed in advance with the organization. Random selection prevents systematic bias toward either party and ensures no single evaluator can repeatedly influence outcomes.Incentives
Evaluators who perform their role correctly receive compensation; evaluators who do not fulfil it face penalties. Performing the role correctly means:- Reading the evidence submitted by both sides carefully
- Applying the Dispute Policy as agreed with the organization, rather than personal opinion
- Reaching a decision in line with how a reasonable, well-informed evaluator would assess the same case
- Meeting the deadlines set for the case
Independence
- No affiliation to Kleros: evaluators are independent citizens or professionals, not employees or contractors of Kleros.
- No affiliation to the organization: evaluators are not selected from within the organization or any related party.
- No affiliation to the claimant: evaluators have no prior relationship with the claimant.
Due Process Guarantees
Kleros is built with procedural guarantees that meet the standards expected by enterprise compliance teams and regulatory bodies.
If either party believes the initial ruling was wrong, they can start an appeal and a larger panel reviews the case. Organizations using Kleros can show that their dispute resolution process meets fundamental standards of fairness, transparency and independence. For the legal basis of these guarantees, see Legal Framework.