Journal of Arbitration Studies (한국중재학회지:중재연구)

The Korean Association of Arbitration Studies (한국중재학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Main Issues and Implications of ICC's 2019 Updated Note to Parties and Arbitral Tribunals on the Conduct of the Arbitration under the ICC Rules of Arbitration: A Focus on ICC's Policy on the Publication of Information Regarding Arbitral Tribunals and Awards

2019년 개정 ICC 중재 진행에 관한 당사자 및 중재판정부 지침의 주요내용과 시사점: ICC의 중재판정부 정보 공개 및 중재판정의 발간 정책을 중심으로

  • 안건형 (대전대학교 국제통상학과)
  • Received : 2019.04.23
  • Accepted : 2019.05.25
  • Published : 2019.06.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The ICC International Court of Arbitration ('the ICC') has published the Note to Parties and Arbitral Tribunals on the Conduct of the Arbitration under the ICC Rules of Arbitration ('2019 Revised Note) which came into force on the 1st of January 2019. The 2019 Revised Note is aimed at providing parties and arbitral tribunals with practical guidance regarding the conduct of arbitrations pursuant to the ICC Arbitration Rules as well as the practices of the ICC. Unless otherwise stipulated, the 2019 Revised Note applies to all ICC arbitration cases, regardless of the version of the ICC Arbitration Rules, in accordance with which they are conducted. The most noteworthy amendment is the introduction of provisions on a new mandatory transparency system by setting forth the publication of the arbitration case data and arbitral awards, maintaining the rule stipulating the provision of information regarding arbitral tribunal under the ICC 2016 Note. Among others, the 2019 Revised Note provides that parties and arbitrators in ICC arbitrations accept that ICC awards made as of the 1st of January 2019 may be published, excluding some exceptions. Under this circumstance, this paper i) explains five amendments of the 2019 ICC Revised Note, ii) examines major issues regarding the publication of information of arbitral tribunal and awards, iii) makes a comparative analysis of that attitude of 11 international arbitration institutions, and lastly iv) suggests recommendations for the Korean arbitration community.

Keywords

References

  1. 강병근, "국제투자중재상 공익보호와 투명성 제고에 관한 연구", 국제법학회논총 제50권 제2호, 대한국제법학회, 2005.
  2. "UNCITRAL 투명성 규칙 초안과 한미 FTA 중재절차의 투명성 규정의 비교 검토", 국제경제법연구 제11권 제1호, 한국국제경제법학회, 2013.
  3. 김갑유, 중재실무강의 개정판, 박영사, 2016.
  4. 김대중.김세진, "EU 투자법원 창설 제안으로 본 국제투자법의 투명성 및 공정성 제고 동향과 시사점", 한국부패학회보 제21권 제4호, 한국부패학회, 2016.
  5. 김인숙, "FTA ISD 소송절차상 투명성에 관한 연구: 한국이 체결한 FTA를 중심으로", 통상법률 제120호, 법무부, 2014.
  6. 류병운, "국제중재에서의 투명성과 기밀성의 경계(境界)", 서울법학 제26권 제3호, 서울시립대학교 법학연구소, 2018.
  7. 목영준.최승재, 상사중재법 개정판, 박영사, 2018.
  8. 석광현, 國際商事仲裁法硏究 제1권, 박영사, 2007.
  9. 안건형, "ICC 중재에서 중재법원의 역할이 KCAB 국제중재규칙에 주는 시사점(사무국, 중재판정부, 국제중재위원회의 업무분장을 중심으로)", 貿易商務硏究 제39권, 한국무역상무학회, 2008.
  10. 오원석.안건형, "ICC 중재에서 중재법원의 제3중재인 선정에 관한 연구", 貿易學會誌 제33권 제1호, 한국무역학회, 2008.
  11. 임성우, 국제중재 , 박영사, 2016.
  12. 한지희, "ISDS 절차의 투명성 제고에 관한 연구", 국제경제법연구 제13권 제1호, 한국국제경제법학회, 2015.
  13. Azzali, A., "Confidentiality vs. Transparency in Commercial Arbitration: A False Contradiction to Overcome", 2012, available at https://blogs.law.nyu.edu/ transnational/2012/12/confidentiality-vs-transparency-in-commercial-arbitration-a-false/
  14. ICC, "ICC issues updated Note providing guidance to parties", 2018, available at https://iccwbo.org/media-wall/news-speeches/icc-issues-updated-note-providing-guidance-parties/.
  15. Kho, S. et al, "ICC issues Practice Note on Three Hot-Topics in International Arbitration: an Arbitrator's Duty of Disclosure; Transparency in "Commercial" Arbitration; and Tribunal Secretaries", 2019, available at https://www.akingump.com/images/content/1/0/v2/101924/International-Arbitration-Alert.pdf.
  16. Landsman, K., Parker, C. & Carter, J. et al, "Publication of International Arbitration Awards and Decisions", Report by the Committee on International Commercial Disputes of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, 2014, p. 1, available at https://www2.nycbar.org/pdf/report/uploads/20072645-PublicationofInternationalArbitrationAwardsandDecisions.pdf.
  17. LCIA, "Challenge Digest", Arbitration International, Vol. 27 Issue 3, 2011.
  18. Nicholas, G. and Partasides, C., "LCIA Court Decisions on Challenges to Arbitrators: A Proposal to Publish", Arbitration International, Vol. 23 Issue 1, 2007.
  19. Queen Mary University of London, "2018 International Arbitration Survey: The Evolution of International Arbitration", p. 3. available at http://www.arbitration.qmul.ac.uk/media/arbitration/docs/2018-International-Arbitration-Survey-report.pdf.
  20. Rogers, K., Ethics in International Arbitration, First Ed., Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2014.
  21. Zlatanska, E., "To Publish, or Not To Publish Arbitral Awards: That is the Question...", Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management, Vol. 81 No. 1, 2015.
  22. Esso Australia Resources Limited v. Plowman (1995) 183 CLR 10, High Court of Australia.