> ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.kleros.io/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # Use Cases > Where Kleros Enterprise fits: fintech and financial services, insurance, airlines and travel, municipal and public sector, arbitration and commercial disputes, and intellectual property. # Enterprise Use Cases Kleros applies wherever an organization needs a fast, impartial and credible way to resolve a dispute with a customer, citizen or counterparty. The use case determines the implementation, not the sector. *** ## Fintech and Financial Services **The problem.** Fintech companies and financial institutions handle large volumes of low-value customer disputes. Handling them internally creates perceived bias, and escalation to regulators or courts is expensive, slow, and rarely improves the customer relationship. How a company handles complaints has a direct impact on whether customers stay: the way a dispute is handled matters as much as the outcome. **How Kleros fits.** Kleros replaces or supplements the final stage of the customer experience process. When a customer is not satisfied with the initial support response, they are offered escalation to Kleros instead of a regulator or court, and the decision is communicated to both parties within days. This covers transaction disputes, account decisions and service disagreements. **Results from the Lemon Cash integration:** | Outcome | Result | | - | - | | Cases resolved | 2,500+ | | Customer retention after a complaint | 78% | | Company win rate | 90% | | Customer lifetime value increase per case | About USD 100 | | Cases escalated to judicial or administrative bodies | 0% | **Benefits:** * **Better customer experience:** fast, consistent decisions, and higher satisfaction after a complaint even when the organization wins, because users trust the independence of the process. * **Lower legal risk:** fewer lawsuits, lower legal and administrative costs, reduced regulatory risk. * **Regulatory alignment in Argentina:** Resolution No. 893/2025 makes Kleros rulings binding when the consumer accepts the outcome, and organizations using Kleros can be listed on the Customer Advocate's official channels. See [Legal Framework](/enterprise/legal#country-specific-frameworks). See the [Lemon Cash case study](/enterprise/case-studies#lemon-cash). *** ## Insurance **The problem.** Payout disputes between claimants and insurers are hard to resolve fairly. The insurer's internal team is seen as conflicted, formal arbitration is expensive relative to the claim, and unresolved disputes carry regulatory and reputational risk. **How Kleros fits.** Kleros acts as a neutral third party. The question for the panel is: given the evidence and the policy terms, should the claim be paid? | Product type | How Kleros applies | | - | - | | Indemnity insurance | Evaluators review the claim, the evidence and the policy terms to decide whether the claim should be paid | | Parametric insurance | Kleros verifies whether the agreed trigger conditions were met (for example, weather events or service outages) | **Process:** 1. The claimant submits the dispute through a simple form (about 5 minutes). 2. The insurer submits its response and documentation. 3. Evaluators review both submissions against the Dispute Policy. 4. A decision is issued within days. 5. If the claim is upheld, payment is made per the ruling. **Benefits:** * **Reduced regulatory exposure:** a documented, impartial review that can satisfy regulatory requirements for complaint handling. * **Cost efficiency:** a fixed cost per case, significantly lower than formal arbitration or litigation, with no legal representation fees. * **Customer trust:** 100% of MetLife Mexico users who had access to the tool chose to use it. See the [MetLife Mexico case study](/enterprise/case-studies#metlife-mexico). *** ## Airlines and Travel **The problem.** Airlines handle large volumes of passenger complaints: baggage, rebooking, service failures and multi-party liability. Poor complaint handling has documented costs: | Risk | Evidence | | - | - | | Reputational damage | A single viral incident cost one airline USD 1.4 billion in market value and generated 125,000 social media mentions in 6 hours ([Fortune](https://fortune.com/2017/04/11/united-airlines-stock-passenger-dragged-off-plane-warren-buffett/)) | | Litigation cost | Luggage charge litigation has cost airlines at least USD 7.5 million ([Simple Flying](https://simpleflying.com/american-airlines-class-action-baggage-lawsuit-7-5-million-settlement/)) | | Retention impact | Airlines with effective service recovery achieve 63% higher retention than those that handle complaints poorly ([SurveySparrow](https://surveysparrow.com/blog/service-recovery-strategies/)) | **How Kleros fits.** Kleros can be inserted at three stages of the passenger complaint journey: | Stage | When | Impact | | - | - | - | | Preventive filter | After the initial customer service rejection | Keeps the complaint from leaving the company | | Selective resolution | At the reconsideration stage | Prioritizes VIP customers and high-risk cases | | Legal mitigation | When the complaint reaches a regulator | An alternative to litigation that saves fines and legal costs | **Airline cases resolved in Kleros:** [an identity error case](https://library.kleros.builders/es/case/110) and [a flight rescheduling case](https://library.kleros.builders/es/case/113). *** ## Municipal and Public Sector **The problem.** Government agencies at municipal, provincial and national level receive large volumes of citizen complaints about consumer protection and neighbourhood disputes. Current processes are slow, in-person, and expensive for both the state and the companies involved. **How Kleros fits.** Kleros adds a fast, online, impartial option for low and medium-value disputes, as a layer before courts or formal channels become necessary. Evaluators are citizens selected against criteria defined by the government body. For neighbourhood disputes they are typically other citizens from the same community: local people resolving local matters, which is why these integrations land well with both citizens and governments. **Process:** 1. A citizen files a complaint through the consumer protection portal, with the amount in dispute, evidence and arguments. 2. The respondent organization is notified digitally. 3. Kleros evaluators review the case and issue a resolution, typically within 5 days. 4. If the ruling favors the citizen, the provider must comply; if it does not, sanctions established by law apply. **Case types:** * **Consumer protection disputes:** complaints against providers that failed to deliver goods or services as agreed, decided under consumer protection law as incorporated in the Dispute Policy. * **Neighbourhood disputes:** disagreements over property boundaries, noise, shared infrastructure and similar matters, currently active in the Lavalle, Mendoza pilot. **Active implementations:** Municipality of Junín (OMIC), Lavalle (Mendoza), and the Judiciary of Mendoza. **Regulatory alignment:** in Argentina, Resolution No. 893/2025 allows the Customer Advocate to be external, collegiate and fully digital. In Mexico, the MASC Law recognizes Kleros under its definition of decentralized justice systems. See [Legal Framework](/enterprise/legal#country-specific-frameworks). See the [Judiciary of Mendoza](/enterprise/case-studies#judiciary-of-mendoza) and Municipality of Junín [case studies](/enterprise/case-studies). *** ## Arbitration and Commercial Disputes **The problem.** Contract disputes between businesses, or with counterparties, are costly: formal arbitration is expensive, courts are slow, and both consume senior staff time and carry reputational risk. **How Kleros fits.** Three modes of use: | Mode | Description | When to use | | - | - | - | | Binding arbitration | The parties agree in advance, through an arbitration clause, that the Kleros ruling is final and binding | For a low-cost, enforceable alternative to formal arbitration | | Expert opinion | Law firms use Kleros rulings as technical expert opinion | To establish technical facts ahead of formal proceedings | | Mock trial | The parties run the case before a Kleros panel first | To see how a dispute would be decided before committing to litigation | **Sample arbitration clause:** > Any dispute arising out of or in connection with this agreement shall be referred to and determined by evaluators constituted under Kleros. The parties agree that any final verdict passed by the Kleros evaluators shall be final and binding. **Precedent:** a landlord-tenant dispute decided by Kleros jurors was enforced by a Mexican court in 2021, the first documented enforcement of a blockchain-based arbitration ruling in a physical court. See [the Jalisco case](/enterprise/legal#the-jalisco-case). **Academic references.** Kleros is a frequent case study in peer-reviewed work on blockchain arbitration, including: * Bergolla, Seif and Eken, *Kleros: A Socio-Legal Case Study of Decentralized Justice & Blockchain Arbitration*, Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, Vol. 37, 2022 ([SSRN](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3918485)) * *Blockchain-Based Dispute Resolution: Insights and Challenges*, Games (MDPI), 2023 ([MDPI](https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/14/3/34)) * Shehryar and Anwar, *The Integration of Blockchain Technology with Arbitration Mechanisms*, Law, Ethics & Technology, 2025 ([ELS Publishing](https://www.elspub.com/papers/j/1933265844638416896.html)) * *Blockchain Arbitration: Roadmap to Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Award*, Cogent Social Sciences, 2025 ([Taylor & Francis](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311886.2025.2536726)) * James Metzger, *The Current Landscape of Blockchain-Based, Crowdsourced Arbitration*, Macquarie Law Journal, 2019 * Aleksei Gudkov, *Crowd Arbitration: Blockchain Dispute Resolution*, Legal Issues in the Digital Age, 2020 See [Research Papers](/research/papers) and the [Kleros research page](https://kleros.io/rd-research) for more. *** ## Intellectual Property **The problem.** IP disputes are among the most complex and costly to resolve. Trademark infringement, licensing disagreements and ownership conflicts need specialized expertise, take months in traditional arbitration and can cost tens of thousands of dollars, which disadvantages smaller rights holders. Organizations with large IP portfolios must also keep registries accurate and verify claims at scale. **How Kleros fits.** Two complementary services: * **Dispute resolution for IP conflicts:** both parties submit evidence and arguments, and a panel of evaluators with relevant expertise decides against the agreed Dispute Policy, in days rather than months. Evaluators can also provide expert opinion on technical facts at a fraction of the cost of a traditional expert. * **IP registry curation with [Kleros Curate](/products/curate):** organizations can maintain verified registries of trademarks, patents and licensing agreements under a defined acceptance policy. Unchallenged submissions are accepted; challenged ones go to a panel that decides whether they meet the registry criteria. | Application | Description | | - | - | | Trademark disputes | Conflicts over trademark use, similarity or infringement between rights holders | | Licensing disagreements | Whether licensing terms were fulfilled or breached | | Expert opinion | Independent technical assessment for wider legal or commercial proceedings | | IP registry management | Verified, transparent registries of trademarks or other IP assets | Kleros has been recognized by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and has collaborated with Thomson Reuters and the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) on online dispute resolution and cross-border IP enforcement. This documentation is built and hosted on [Mintlify](https://mintlify.com), a developer documentation platform.