Evidence

Evidence

The role of documentary evidence in arbitration

This Practice Note explains the importance of evidence in arbitration and highlights how it is treated differently compared with court litigation. It provides practical tips about introducing documentary evidence into arbitration proceedings, how a tribunal may apply rules of evidence and how to deal with evidence in the hands of third parties to the arbitration.

See Practice Note: The role of documentary evidence in arbitration.

Disputes over documentary evidence in arbitration

This Practice Note covers how the parties, the tribunal and the court (under section 43 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) for English-seated arbitrations) may be involved in the resolution of disputes over documentary evidence in arbitration. It includes discussion of the guidance set out in the International Bar Association Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (IBA Rules). It also covers the consequences of a party's failure to comply with an order to produce issued by the tribunal. In resolving a dispute over evidence, parties often make use of a Redfern Schedule (see Precedent below).

See Practice Note:

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Arbitration News

Construction Arbitration Centre Asia Pacific established as specialist dispute resolution centre

The Construction Arbitration Centre Asia Pacific (CACAP) has been established as a specialist, not-for-profit centre for the resolution of construction and infrastructure disputes in the Asia-Pacific region. Established by practitioners across construction, law and arbitration, CACAP will maintain five accredited panels, covering technical, commercial and legal expertise. CACAP will provide a range of dispute resolution services, including arbitration, mediation, expert determination, expert witness appointments and dispute boards. It will also maintain procedural protocols, practice notes and guidance documents tailored to construction and infrastructure disputes. In addition, CACAP will offer professional accreditation across five disciplines, with accredited practitioners eligible for inclusion on panels of qualified neutrals.

Who decides what? Clarifying the boundaries of Appellate Control over Exequatur in France(France – Federative Republic of Brazil (União) v [J])

Arbitration analysis: On 8 January 2026, the Paris Court of Appeal, sitting through the conseiller de la mise en état, held that it lacked jurisdiction to determine the admissibility of a plea seeking annulment of an exequatur order on the basis of an alleged excess of power of the first-instance judge. According to the court, such a plea concerns the appeal itself and therefore falls within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal sitting as a full bench, rather than that of the conseiller de la mise en état acting alone. The order was made in proceedings concerning the exequatur in France of a partial award rendered in São Paulo under the auspices of the Câmara de Arbitragem do Mercado (CAM), in a shareholder dispute between minority shareholders of Petrobras and the Federative Republic of Brazil (the União). Although the ruling addresses a strictly procedural issue, it usefully clarifies the allocation of functions between the pre-trial judge (conseiller de la mise en état) and the appellate bench in proceedings brought against exequatur orders under article 1527 of the French Code of Civil Procedure. It confirms that a procedural argument seeking to invalidate the appeal (fin de non-recevoir), where that argument is in fact tied to the substance of the appeal itself, must be decided by the full bench and cannot be filtered out by a single judge at the pre-trial stage. The ruling therefore has practical implications for how parties should frame and time their procedural arguments in exequatur-related appeals. Written by Marie-Laure Cartier and Alexandre Meyniel, partners at Cartier Meyniel AARPI with Sami Kabbara, trainee lawyer at the Paris Bar Centre and intern at Cartier Meyniel AARPI.

Delos to host comparative contract law presentation on 24 March 2026 during Paris Arbitration Week

Delos has announced a presentation on comparative contract law to be held on 24 March 2026 as part of Paris Arbitration Week. The event will explore good faith, principles of contractual interpretation and change of circumstances. Leading practitioners will discuss the understanding and application of these concepts under English, French and German law, with a focus on underlying principles. Speakers will include Gustavo Moser of the LexisNexis UK Arbitration team, and Vivek Kapoor, Arbitration Consulting Editorial Board member. The event will be held at the Paris Arbitration Centre, with an online session available for remote participants.

Iceland notifies withdrawal from Energy Charter Treaty effective March 2027

The Energy Charter Secretariat has announced that Iceland has submitted written notification of its decision to withdraw from the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT). Under Article 47 of the ECT, the withdrawal will take effect one year after receipt of the notification by the Secretariat. Accordingly, Iceland’s withdrawal will take effect on 17 March 2027.