Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Subscribe now for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Confidentiality and Transparency in International Arbitration: Asia-Pacific Tensions and Expectations

Confidentiality and Transparency in International Arbitration: Asia-Pacific Tensions and... CONFIDENTIALITY AND TRANSPARENCY IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION: ASIA-PACIFIC TENSIONS AND EXPECTATIONS ** by Luke Nottage Confidentiality is still widely seen as significant advantage of international commercial arbitration (ICA) over cross-border litigation, especially perhaps in Asia. This can be seen in rules of most arbitral institutions. Automatic (opt-out) confidentiality is also now found in many national laws, including statutory add-ons to the UNCITRAL Model Law and/or through case law for example in New Zealand, then Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia, and even- tually Australia. Yet there remain variations in the timing of these developments as well as the scope and procedures associated with exceptions to confidentiality. There is also no confidentiality provided in Japan’s later adoption of the Model Law, although parties mostly choose the JCAA so opt-in to its Rules, which have somewhat expanded confidentiality obligations since 2014. * An earlier version of this article was presented for a seminar of ARBIT (Italian Forum for Arbitration and ADR) at the Italian Arbitration Association, Rome, 30 September 2019. I thank discussants and other attendees for that opportunity, especially Andrew Paton as main organiser, and Dr Nobumichi Teramura (Adelaide University) and Ashley Taylor Kelaita (CAPLUS intern) for excellent editorial and research assistance for http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Asian International Arbitration Journal Kluwer Law International

Confidentiality and Transparency in International Arbitration: Asia-Pacific Tensions and Expectations

Asian International Arbitration Journal , Volume 16 (1): 24 – May 1, 2020

Loading next page...
 
/lp/kluwer-law-international/confidentiality-and-transparency-in-international-arbitration-asia-ZBgG7QVkhA

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Kluwer Law International
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands
ISSN
1574-3330
Publisher site

Abstract

CONFIDENTIALITY AND TRANSPARENCY IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION: ASIA-PACIFIC TENSIONS AND EXPECTATIONS ** by Luke Nottage Confidentiality is still widely seen as significant advantage of international commercial arbitration (ICA) over cross-border litigation, especially perhaps in Asia. This can be seen in rules of most arbitral institutions. Automatic (opt-out) confidentiality is also now found in many national laws, including statutory add-ons to the UNCITRAL Model Law and/or through case law for example in New Zealand, then Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia, and even- tually Australia. Yet there remain variations in the timing of these developments as well as the scope and procedures associated with exceptions to confidentiality. There is also no confidentiality provided in Japan’s later adoption of the Model Law, although parties mostly choose the JCAA so opt-in to its Rules, which have somewhat expanded confidentiality obligations since 2014. * An earlier version of this article was presented for a seminar of ARBIT (Italian Forum for Arbitration and ADR) at the Italian Arbitration Association, Rome, 30 September 2019. I thank discussants and other attendees for that opportunity, especially Andrew Paton as main organiser, and Dr Nobumichi Teramura (Adelaide University) and Ashley Taylor Kelaita (CAPLUS intern) for excellent editorial and research assistance for

Journal

Asian International Arbitration JournalKluwer Law International

Published: May 1, 2020

There are no references for this article.