Skip to main content

Culture Clash in Handling Document Request of the Parties

The disputing parties often cannot agree on document request, the way, and sequence of written submissions. A party may insist that submissions must be made upfront, including all claims, legal ground, and evidence. By contrast, some other may prefer that evidence being developed further due the course of the proceedings. It appears also to be difficult for the Tribunal if one party attempts to "fishing expedition", seeking tribunal' order to rule the counterparty to produce certain documents.

As matter of law, parties in an arbitration at VIAC can submit evidence up to any point prior to the final hearing. According to § 25.4 VIAC Rules, § 19.1 VIAC rule, there is no clear rule which restricts the parties right to submit evidence up to certain point during the proceedings. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the tribunal has not the right to restrict arbitrary the parties’ right to submit further evidence at any point of proceedings until the final hearing. 

On another hand, parties cannot exchange their responds back and forth forever to prolong unnecessary the arbitration. To avoid abuse of endless submission, the tribunal has the power to manage the Case in according with §§ 18-20 VIAC Rules. The POs and Timetable to govern the proceedings, the power to allocate arbitration cost, are some means for the tribunal to manage the arbitration in the workable way.

Sometime, the sequence of submission also may matter. Who is obliged to submit what, at which sequence? The basic rule in Vietnam law: Any claim to arbitration must be accompanied by supporting evidence. Law on Commercial Arbitration (LCA 2010) and the VIAC Rules 2017 content such rules:   § 30.3 LCA 2010: The arbitration agreement and originals or copies of relevant must accompany the statement of claim§ 7.3 VIAC Rules 2017: “The Request for Arbitration shall be accompanied by the arbitration agreement and other relevant documentsA further basic principle can be found in VN Civil Procedure Code, at § 189.5 Civil Procedure Code. The basic principle is that: any claim must be accompanied with evidence. Violation of such principles can be a reason for the court to set aside arbitral award in accordance with § 68.2.dd LCA 2010.

That way of consecutive submissions appear also to be common practice at international arbitration. Example: UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules 2013, § 20.4 “4. The statement of claim should, as far as possible, be accompanied by all documents and other evidence relied upon by the claimant, or contain references to them”. And § 21.4: The provisions of article 20, paragraphs 2 to 4, shall apply to a counterclaim, a claim under article 4, paragraph 2 (f), and a claim relied on for the purpose of a set-off”.

The choice among consecutive or simultaneous submission is a matter of opinion, depending on circumstances of the case. As noted by UNCITRAL, consecutive and simultaneous submission, both have advantage and disadvantage. Simultaneous submissions not always save time if the parties request additional document production. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Enjoy the Voyage: Behind the Scenes of Tribunal Deliberations

Arbitration can be very simple, but it can also be a voyage to nowhere in the middle of the sea. From the departure to destination, the Tribunal as collective is expected to steer the board. It shall make decisions, either procedural or on merits, by deliberation. But how tribunal deliberations work, particularly in cross-cultural arbitration? That is certainly a mysterious black-box, because tribunal deliberations are case specific (it depends on the nature of the disputes), tribunal specific (it depends on the composition of the tribunal, the background and profile, and mentality of the presiding arbitrator and its fellows), and the like. But there are some best practice for efficient deliberations: Not consensus, but collegiality is important: each arbitrator shall actively be involved. Not focusing on the destination, enjoying the voyage: the facts, the issues, the rational behind the disputes are important. Not merely the award, an efficient case management, fairness and due
  Pham Duy Nghia graduated at Leipzig University in Germany (LLB 1988, PhD 1991). He was a Fulbright visiting scholar at Harvard Law School (2001-2002). At Fulbright University Vietnam he teaches Law and Public Policy, Public Governance, Research Methods of Public Policy. As arbitrator Prof Pham Duy Nghia has served in more than 100 cases hearing transnational business disputes, including commercial, investment, construction, insurance, corporate disputes, M & A and intellectual property disputes. Besides teaching, research, and practicing law, Pham Duy Nghia is a frequent commentator in leading newspapers and media in Vietnam. The areas concerned include protection of basic citizen’s right, voice and accountability in public governance, regulatory quality, rule of law and access to justice.

Đoán định tư pháp là gì?

Bài viết ngắn dưới đây góp phần tìm hiểu và trả lời các câu hỏi sau đây: (i) Đoán định tư pháp là gì, ra đời trong bối cảnh nào, có ảnh hưởng gì trong ngành tư pháp trên thế giới, (ii) Ngành tư pháp Việt Nam nên chuẩn bị như thế nào để chủ động ứng xử với xu thế Đoán định tư pháp [1] . Đoán định tư pháp (Predictive Justice) là gì? 1.       Đoán định tư pháp là một xu thế thay đổi cung cách cung cấp dịch vụ pháp lý, trong đó có hoạt động xét xử của tòa án, dưới sức ép của thời đại dữ liệu lớn (big data), trí tuệ nhân tạo (AI), với sự xuất hiện của các công ty khởi nghiệp công nghệ pháp lý (Legal Tech start-up), cung cấp những giải pháp tư vấn, hỗ trợ pháp lý trên nền tảng của các công nghệ thông minh. 2.       Xu thế này bắt nguồn từ những nỗ lực cung cấp nguồn luật mở (open data) từ 50 năm nay. Do công nghệ thay đổi rất nhanh (máy tính, vật liệu bán dẫn, chip điện tử, mạng Internet, các thuật toán dẫn tới trí tuệ nhân tạo), 50 năm qua máy tính đã thông minh hơn 1,