Claimant's brief (Cologne) - Pace University

UNIVERSITY OF COLOGNE Page VII
II. This interpretation of Art. 34.6 (a)-(e) SIAC Rules is in line with the LCIA
Rules, on which the SIAC Rules are based.............................................................25
C. There is no justification to limit the scope of Art. 34.6 (d) SIAC Rules........................26
I. The UNCITRAL ML does not provide for confidentiality......................................26
II. There is no mandatory principle in international arbitration that would require
a different interpretation from Art. 34.6 (d) SIAC Rules........................................26
1. A number of jurisdictions deny that a duty of confidentiality is inherent in
arbitration.........................................................................................................26
2. In those jurisdictions which regard confidentiality as inherent in
arbitration, CLAIMANT’s disclosure falls within the scope of recognized
exceptions........................................................................................................27
SIXTH ISSUE: EVEN IF CLAIMANT WERE OBLIGED TO REFRAIN FROM
DISCLOSURE, THE TRIBUNAL MAY NOT ORDER CONFIDENTIALITY.........28
A. The Arbitral Tribunal is not authorized to issue an order of confidentiality..................28
I. The Tribunal is not authorized to issue an order of confidentiality, since the
arbitration agreement does not provide for such authority......................................28
II. The SIAC Rules do not authorise the Tribunal to order confidentiality...................29
II. The UNCITRAL ML does not give the Tribunal the power to order
confidentiality........................................................................................................30
B. Even if the Tribunal were authorized, it should refrain from ordering
confidentiality.............................................................................................................30
I. RESPONDENT’s interest in an order of confidentiality does not justify the
harm caused to CLAIMANT..................................................................................30
II. RESPONDENT apparently tries to abuse the measure contrary to its
designated purpose................................................................................................31
SEVENTH ISSUE: NO CONSEQUENCES WOULD ARISE IF CLAIMANT
VIOLATED AN ORDER OF CONFIDENTIALITY...................................................32
A. Violation of a possible confidentiality order would not affect the validity of the
arbitration agreement...................................................................................................32
B. The Tribunal may not draw any negative inferences in the final award........................32
C. The Tribunal has no authority to order punitive action against CLAIMANT................33
D. An order for confidentiality would not be enforceable.................................................33
CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................35