Metrics

  • citations in SCIndeks: [1]
  • citations in CrossRef:0
  • citations in Google Scholar:[]
  • visits in previous 30 days:9
  • full-text downloads in 30 days:6

Contents

article: 7 from 19  
Back back to result list
2018, vol. 52, iss. 2, pp. 449-476
Confidentiality and transparency in international arbitration
University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Law

emailM.Stanivukovic@pf.uns.ac.rs
Abstract
It is very often heard that confidentiality is one of the principal advantages of arbitration. Nevertheless, confidentiality is not recognized as a general principle of arbitration and there are no provisions on confidentiality to be found in legal sources such as the New York Covention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, or the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. If arbitration is very often confidential, this comes from the nature of things rather than from hard and fast rules. This paper explores to what extent has confidentiality ceased to be the basic feature of arbitration in modern practice. The trend towards greater transparency has germinated mainly in the field of investment arbitration during the last two decades, but it had diffused accross international commercial arbitration. The UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency in Investment Arbitration are the result of that development that was driven by different forces and interests: those of arbitral institutions, arbitrators, legal counsel, non-governmental organizations, states and the general public. That development has enabled the system of quasi-precedent in investor-state arbitration and incited numerious challenges of arbitrators. It has informed the observers of gender and ethnic inequality prevailing in this line of legal business. Step by step, each segment of the arbitral procedure became open to the public in investor-state arbitrations: the names of the parties and the fact that the dispute is pending, the names of arbitrators and legal counsel, the arbitral award and the outcome of the dispute, procedural orders, memorials and exhibits, hearing and transcripts of the hearing. The things that would be just unheard of in the nineties, such as broadcasting of the hearing, started to happen in the new millenium. Influenced by this trend, the institutions predominantly operating in the field of commercial arbitration, such as the ICC, started revealing more of their own business. Although some of them, such as the LCIA still give great weight to confidentiality, it is generally difficult not to succumb in one way or another to the newest transparency trend, that is, like an irresistible force, changing the face of arbitration.
References
*** (2006) Biwater Gauf v. Tanzania (ICSID Case No. ARB/05/22): Procedural Order No. 3. 29. September 2006, pasus 131
*** (2006) Biwater Gauf v. Tanzania (ICSID Case No. ARB/05/22): Procedural order No. 3. 29. September 2006, pasus 119
Blackaby, N., i dr., ur. (2015) Redfern & hunter on international arbitration. Oxford University Press, 145; 6th edition, pasus 2
Chang-fa, L. (2008) On a balanced mechanism for publishing arbitral awards. Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, 235
Cheng, T. (2006) Precedent and Control in Investment Treaty Arbitration. Fordham International Law Journal, 4, 1014
Comrie, P., Thomson, A. (2017) Statement of Arbitral Jurisprudence: The Case for a National Law Obligation to Publish International Commercial Arbitral Awards. Journal of International Arbitration, 2, 275
de Brabandere, E. Investment Treaty Arbitration as Public International Law, pasus. pasus 157-163
de Brabandere, E. (2014) Investment Treaty Arbitration as Public International Law, Procedural Aspects and Implications. 148
Đajić, S.V. (2016) Fragmentacija međunarodnog prava i specijalni pravni režimi. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad, vol. 50, br. 2, str. 439-459
Đundić, P. (2012) Učešće lica koja nisu stranke u arbitražnom postupku i zaštita javnog interesa pred arbitražnim sudom IKSID. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Novi Sad, vol. 46, br. 3, str. 321-341
Franck, S.D. (2005) The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decisions. Fordham Law Review, 73: 1544-1545
Gaillard, F. Goldman on international commercial arbitration. [ed.] pasus 1132
Gazzini, T., de Brabandere, E. (2012) International Investment Law. The Sources of Rights and Obligations. Leiden-Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
Giorgetti, C., ur. (2015) Challenges and recusals of judges and arbitrators in international courts and tribunals. Leiden - Boston: Brill, 57
Jovanović, M. (2015) Novi pravni okvir za transparentnost u međunarodnoj investicionoj arbitraži. Pravni život, br. 11, str. 239-254
Karton, J. (2012) A Conflict of Interests: Seeking a Way Forward on Publication of International Arbitral Awards. Arbitration International, 28(3): 447-486
Kaufmann-Kohler, G. (2007) Arbitral Precedent: Dream, Necessity or Excuse?: The 2006 Freshfields Lecture. Arbitration International, 23(3): 357-378
Klausegger, Ch., i dr., ur. (2018) Austrian Yearbook on International Arbitration. 78
Legum, B. (2003) Trends and Challenges in Investor-State Arbitration. Arbitration International, 19(2): 143-147
Malatesta, A., Sali, R., ur. (2013) The rise of transparency in international arbitration: The case for the anonymous publication of arbitral awards. Juris
Paulsson, J., Rawding, N. (1995) The Trouble with Confidentiality. Arbitration International, 11(3): 303-320
Paulsson, J., Petrochilos, G. (2017) Uncitral arbitration. Kluwer Law International, 399
Rogers, C. (2006) Transparency in International Commercial Arbitration. University of Kansas Law Review, 54: 1313-1319
Schreuer, C. (2002) The ICSID Convention, A Commentary. Cambridge University Press, 819-828
Schultsz, J.C., van den Berg, A.J., ur. (1982) The art of arbitration: Essays on international arbitration liber Amicorum Pieter Sanders 12 September 1912-1982. Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, 223
Trehearne, C. (2018) Transparency, legitimacy, and investor-state dispute settlement: What can we learn from the streaming of hearings?. Kluwer Arbitration Blog, 9. June, http://arbitrationblog.kluwerarbitration.com/2018/06/09/transparency-legitimacy-investor-state-dispute-settlement-can-learn-streaming-hearings/?print=pdf
Tung, Sh., Lin, B. The Arbitrator and the Arbitration Procedure, More Transparency in International Commercial Arbitration: To Have Or Not To Have?
 

About

article language: Serbian
document type: Original Scientific Paper
DOI: 10.5937/zrpfns52-18945
published in SCIndeks: 20/05/2019
peer review method: double-blind
Creative Commons License 4.0