Beaumont, B (2009) Confidentiality in arbitration: A myth or an achievable goal? Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 162(4), pp. 141-146. ISSN 17514312
Abstract
This paper examines the extent to which the requirement for confidentiality or secrecy within the arbitral process can be maintained from the commencement of the arbitration to the finalisation of an appeal through the court process in England and Wales. The paper starts from the premise that confidentiality, being allegedly a key factor in arbitration, can, and should, be maintained throughout. It will focus on two leading cases, only one of which is given at the level of the Court of Appeal. The other case was issued by the Privy Council albeit the House of Lords in another name. The paper will touch upon whether parties are properly focusing their minds on preparation of an all-encompassing arbitration agreement, which contains an effective confidentiality clause. Further, it will examine whether the judiciary, while correctly emphasising the need for public interest to be satisfied at all times wherever faults are to be found in the arbitration process yet made by way of somewhat obscure indications to the parties as to how fundamental and continuous confidentiality can be achieved.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | contracts and law; disputes and arbitration |
| Index terms: | arbitration, England, public interest, dispute, confidentiality, Wales, judiciary |
| Subjects: | legal systems, Geography, professional ethics, dispute resolution, political science |
| Topics: | Governance, Legal Issues, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here