Conference programme

Confidentiality is often described as one of the key reasons parties choose to resolve disputes through international arbitration. However, there has always been a push for greater transparency, which has extended to both investor-state and commercial arbitrations. Some leading arbitral institutions have amended their rules and new arbitration laws have been introduced in various jurisdictions to increase public access to information previously considered confidential. Another aspect of confidentiality pertains to the secrecy of the arbitrators’ deliberations. Arbitrators sometimes face applicants seeking disclosure of their deliberation records. This panel will examine these issues and share their perspectives on what the future holds.

This Oxford Union-style panel will delve into two issues, with one panellist defending the motion and the other rebutting it. The first motion will be: ‘this house believes that international arbitral tribunals should rely more frequently on tribunal-appointed experts’ evidence’. While in some jurisdictions it is common practice for courts and arbitral tribunals to heavily rely on tribunal-appointed experts, in international arbitration this is rarely the case and the evidence gathering relating to complex technical and quantum issues is generally left to the parties and the party-appointed experts. During the motion the panellists will discuss the pros and cons of the two approaches. The second motion will be: ‘this house believes that foreign investors receive adequate protection from investor-state arbitration when investing in Latin America’. Many Latin American states have gone through important political and regulatory changes over the last few years. Moreover, the only states that have denounced the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention so far come from the region. During the motion, the panellists will discuss the level of protection that foreign investors can encounter in Latin America.