The Duty of Confidentiality

  • Katia Fach Gómez


The duty of confidentiality of investment adjudicators is currently dealt with in legal spheres such as ICSID or the ICS. A proper understanding of contemporary facets of this duty requires giving appropriate consideration to existing provisions on transparency vis-à-vis the public. While it falls to investment adjudicators to police the correct application of transparency provisions, these adjudicators also retain formal ties to confidentiality provisions, whose wording sometimes has its origins in other legal sectors such as commercial arbitration or the national judicial systems. There are specific moments in investment arbitration proceedings that are clearly under the investment adjudicator’s control (tribunal deliberations, etc.). In this kind of situation, the existence of a duty of confidentiality attributable to the investment adjudicator makes absolute sense. Nevertheless, if the confidentiality provisions in the contemporary investment context are to be correctly interpreted, the importance of notions such as “public information” needs to be ascertained, which may raise the question of whether investment adjudicators’ duty of confidentiality is really as broad in practice as currently supposed.


  1. Bjorklund A (2016) NAFTA Chapter XI’s contribution to transparency in investment arbitration. Austrian Yearb Int Arbitr 10:291–310Google Scholar
  2. Born GB (2012) International arbitration: law and practice. Wolters Kluwer, The Netherlands, p 196Google Scholar
  3. Brown C, Winch P (2019) The confidentiality and transparency debate in commercial and investment mediation. In: Titi C, Fach Gómez K (eds) International commercial and investment mediation. Oxford University Press, Oxford., in pressGoogle Scholar
  4. Buntenbroich D (2014) All parties in investment arbitration will need to adapt to new UNCITRAL rules on transparency.
  5. Buys CG (2003) The tensions between confidentiality and transparency in international arbitration. Am Rev Int Arbitr 14:121–138Google Scholar
  6. Carmody M (2016) Overturning the presumption of confidentiality: should the UNCITRAL rules on transparency be applied to international commercial arbitration? Int Trade Bus Law Rev 16:96–179Google Scholar
  7. Derains Y (2012) Fifth annual international commercial arbitration lecture. The arbitrator’s deliberation. Am Univ Int Law Rev 27(4):911–923Google Scholar
  8. Draetta U (2016) Cooperation among arbitrators in international arbitration. Indian J Arbitr Law 5(1):107–146Google Scholar
  9. Euler D, Gehring M, Scherer M (eds) (2015) Transparency in international investment arbitration: a guide to the UNCITRAL rules on treaty-based investor-state arbitration. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Fach Gómez K (2019) The avoidance of ex parte communications in international arbitration and its possible effects on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. In: Fach Gómez K, López Rodríguez AM (eds) 60 Years of the New York Convention. Key Issues and Future Challenges, in pressGoogle Scholar
  11. Fortier U (1999) The occasionally unwarranted assumption of confidentiality. Arbitr Int 15(2):131–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gu W (2005) Confidentiality revisited: blessing or curse in international commercial arbitration. Am Rev Int Arbitr 15:607–637Google Scholar
  13. Juratowitch B (2017) Departing from confidentiality in international dispute resolution. Br Inst Int Comp Law.
  14. Kawharu A (2007) Public participation and transparency in international investment arbitration: Suez v. Argentina. N Z Yearb Int Law 4:159–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kinnear M, Diop A (2010) Use of the media by counsel in investor-state arbitration. In: ICCA Congress Series. Arbitration Advocacy in Changing Times 15. Wolters Kluwer, Netherlands, pp 40–51.Google Scholar
  16. Knahr C, Reinisch A (2007) Transparency versus confidentiality in international investment arbitration- The Biwater Gauff Compromise. Law Pract Int Courts Tribunals 6:97–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mahoney P (2008) The international judiciary-independence and accountability. Law Pract Int Courts Tribunals 7(3):313–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Malatesta A, Sali R (2013) The rise of transparency in international arbitration. Juris, Huntington, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Malintoppi L, Limbasan N (2015) Living in glass houses? The debate on transparency in international investment arbitration. BCDR Int Arbitr Rev 2(1):31–57Google Scholar
  20. Maupin JA (2013) Transparency in international investment law: the good, the bad and the Murky.
  21. Newcombe A (2010) Confidentiality in investment treaty arbitration (Giovanna A Beccara and others v. The Argentine Republic). Kluwer Arbitration Blog.
  22. Noussia K (2010) Confidentiality in international commercial arbitration. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Poorooye A, Feehili R (2017) Confidentiality and transparency in international commercial arbitration: finding the right balance. Harv Negot Law Rev 22:275–323Google Scholar
  24. Puig S (2015) The social cost of secrecy in international investment arbitration. Kluwer Arbitration Blog.
  25. Shirlow E (2016) Dawn of a new era? The UNCITRAL Rules and UN Convention on transparency in treaty-based investor-state arbitration. ICSID Rev 31(3):622–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. White & Case (2018) International arbitration survey: the evolution of international arbitration.
  27. Yu HL, Olmos Giupponi B (2016) The Pandora’s Box effects under the UNCITRAL transparency rules. J Bus Law 5:347–369Google Scholar

Legal and Arbitration References

    International Conventions

    1. ICSID (1966) Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States.
    2. UN (2014) Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration.
    3. UNCITRAL (2014) UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration.

    Arbitration Acts, Institutional Arbitration Rules, and Codes of Conduct

    1. CAS (2017) Procedural Rules of the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
    2. IBA (2010) Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration.
    3. ICDR (2014) International Dispute Resolution Procedures.
    4. KLRCA (2013) Revised Code of Conduct for Arbitrator.
    5. Polish Chamber of Commerce of Warsaw (n.a.) Code of Ethics of the Court of Arbitration.
    6. SIAC (2015) Code of Ethics for an Arbitrator.
    7. SIAC (2017) Investment Arbitration Rules.
    8. Kingdom of Spain (2013) Spanish Arbitration Act
    9. Swiss Chamber’s Arbitration Institution (2012) Swiss Rules of International Arbitration.

    Legal Documents

    1. Study Group of the International Law Association on the Practice and Procedure of International Courts and Tribunals, in association with the Project on International Courts and Tribunals (2004) Burgh House Principles on the Independence of The International Judiciary.
    2. Consultative Council of European Judges (2010) Magna Carta of Judges (Fundamental Principles)
    3. CJEU (2016) Code of Conduct for Members and former Members of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
    4. ICSID (last accessed in June 2018) Confidentiality and Transparency.
    5. UN. Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (1985) Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary.
    6. UNCITRAL (2016) Notes on Organising Arbitral Proceedings.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katia Fach Gómez
    • 1
  1. 1.Tenured Professor (Profesora Titular) at the Law SchoolUniversity of ZaragozaZaragozaSpain

Personalised recommendations