Transparency And Data Protection: Conflicts and Resolutions in International Commercial Arbitration
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/a2czzj90Keywords:
Transparency; data protection; arbitration; conflicts.Abstract
This paper delves into the intricate relationship between transparency and confidentiality in international commercial arbitration. It elucidates the significance and meaning of these two values in the context of arbitration, highlighting their crucial roles in maintaining fairness, trust, and legitimacy. The paper navigates through the impact of data disclosure on parties' privacy rights and emphasizes the need for a delicate equilibrium between transparency and data protection. Furthermore, it explores various strategies for resolving conflicts between these values, including the establishment of effective information disclosure and informed consent mechanisms, the utilization of anonymization and pseudonymization techniques, the optimization and innovation of arbitration rules and procedures, and the development of applicable data protection guidelines and standards. In conclusion, this paper underscores the pivotal role of confidentiality as the primary value objective in commercial arbitration, while acknowledging the intrinsic value of transparency in ensuring justice. It underscores that both values are interdependent, shaping the framework of the arbitration system, and their harmonious coexistence is vital for the continued relevance of international commercial arbitration in a rapidly changing global landscape.
Downloads
References
(2005) Judgment No. 43 of Huyi ZhongMinwu (Shang) Chuzi.
(2000) Fred H. Cate, Michael E. Staten, Protecting Privacy in the New Millennium: The Fallacy of “Opt-In”, National Retail Federation.
(2021) Guo Xiaowei: "On the establishment of Personal information protection principles in App" No. 10 of Network Security and Informatization.
(1981) Report of the Secretary-General on Possible Features of a Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, XII Y.B. UNCITRAL 75, 90.
(2012) Gary b. born,International Arbitration: Law and Practice.
Lyons, Arbitration: The Slower, More Expensive Alternative, The American Lawyer 107 (Jan./Feb. 1985); Blue Tee Corp. v. Koehring Co., 999 F.2d 633 (2d Cir. 1993)
Buehring-Uhle, A Survey on Arbitration and Settlement in International Business Disputes, in C. Drahozal & R. Naimark, towards a Science of International Arbitration: Collected Empirical Research 35 (2005) (confidentiality third in list of11 reasons for arbitration).
New York Convention, Arts. II (1) & II (3) (emphasis added).
UNCITRAL Model Law, Arts. 8(1) & 7(1) (emphasis added).
Dell Computer Corp. v. Union des consommateurs, 2007 SCC 34, at ¶51 (Canadian S.Ct.).
Howsam v. Dean W itter Reynolds, Inc., 537 U.S. 79, 83 (U.S. S.Ct. 2002) (quoting Steelworkers v. W arrior
(2005) Buehring-Uhle, A Survey on Arbitration and Settlement in International Business Disputes, in C. Drahozal & R. Naimark, towards a Science of International Arbitration: Collected Empirical Research 35
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.






