Home > All journals > Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management > 86(4) >
$25.00 - Rental (PDF) *
$49.00 - Article (PDF) *
Srishti Kumar, Raghvendra Pratap Singh
Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management
Volume 86, Issue 4 (2020) pp. 463 – 481
https://doi.org/10.54648/amdm2020037
Abstract
The debate between confidentiality and transparency in international commercial arbitration is not recent. While confidentiality had been considered one of the critical features of international commercial arbitration, lately, it has been argued that transparency is required for arbitration to succeed as an efficient and reliable method of dispute resolution. This article seeks to address if confidentiality forms the cornerstone of all commercial arbitration or the higher calls for transparency are justified and possible without adversely affecting the popularity of arbitration as the most preferred mode of alternative dispute resolution. The authors would argue that confidentiality and transparency are not necessarily adversarial, and it is possible to achieve the right balance between the interests of the arbitrating parties seeking confidentiality and the need for greater transparency. Further, the authors would attempt to examine the process of arbitration and the feasibility of making the various stages of the process more transparent.
Keywords
confidentiality, transparency, international commercial arbitration, arbitral award, disclosure, arbitral proceedings, third-party funding
Extract
The debate between confidentiality and transparency in international commercial arbitration is not recent. While confidentiality had been considered one of the critical features of international commercial arbitration, lately, it has been argued that transparency is required for arbitration to succeed as an efficient and reliable method of dispute resolution. This article seeks to address if confidentiality forms the cornerstone of all commercial arbitration or the higher calls for transparency are justified and possible without adversely affecting the popularity of arbitration as the most preferred mode of alternative dispute resolution. The authors would argue that confidentiality and transparency are not necessarily adversarial, and it is possible to achieve the right balance between the interests of the arbitrating parties seeking confidentiality and the need for greater transparency. Further, the authors would attempt to examine the process of arbitration and the feasibility of making the various stages of the process more transparent.