We use cookies to enhance your experience on our website. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.
Find out more
Jump to Content
Jump to Main Navigation
User Account
Personal Profile:
Sign in
or
Create
See all online law products
More
About
Guided Tour
Subscriber Services
FAQ
Contact Us
Help
Search
This site
Oxford Legal Research Library
Browse all
Subject
Human rights
International co-operation
International criminal law
International economic law
International procedural law
International responsibility
Law of treaties
Settlement of disputes
Sources, foundations and principles of international law
Statehood, jurisdiction of states, organs of states
Theory of international law
Author
My Content
(0)
My Searches
(0)
Print
Email
Subscriber sign in
Forgotten your password?
Don't have an account?
Sign in via your Institution
Sign in with your library card
View translated passages only
Oxford Law Citator
Contents
Expand All
Collapse All
Attorney-Client Privilege in International Arbitration by Möckesch, Annabelle (26th January 2017)
Preliminary Material
Foreword
Acknowledgements
Table of Contents
Table of Cases
European Union
Australia
Canada
United Kingdom
House of Lords/Supreme Court
Privy Council
England
Court of Appeal
Court of Appeal in Chancery
High Court
Other Courts
Germany
Federal Constitutional Court
Federal Court of Justice
Courts of Appeal
District Courts
Hong Kong
India
Switzerland
United States
Supreme Court
Courts of Appeals
District Courts
Other Courts
International Commercial Arbitration
Investor-State Arbitration
Table of Legislation
International Conventions and Statutes
European Union
Bilateral or Multilateral Treaties
Arbitration Rules
Other Soft Law Instruments
National Arbitration Legislation
Other National Laws
Canada
England & Wales
France
Germany
Kazakhstan
Tanzania
United States of America
List of Abbreviations
Main Text
1 Introduction
Preliminary Material
I Introduction to the Research Subject
A The Need for Attorney–Client Privilege and Differences between National Laws
1.01
1.02
1.03
1.04
1.05
1.06
1.07
1.08
1.09
B The Role of Attorney–Client Privilege in International Arbitration
1.10
1.11
C The Difficulties in Determining the Applicable Attorney–Client Privilege Standard in International Arbitration and the Need for Clear Guidance
1.12
1.13
1.14
1.15
1.16
1.17
II Outline of the Study
1.18
1.19
1.20
1.21
1.22
1.23
1.24
III A Note on Resources from Arbitral Practice
1.25
IV Introduction of Key Terms and the Document Production Process
1.26
A Privilege
1.27
1.28
1.29
B Attorney–Client Privilege
1.30
1.31
C Work-Product Protection
1.32
1.33
D Privilege in Contrast to the Duty of Confidentiality in International Commercial Arbitration
1.34
1.35
E Attorney–Client Privilege in Contrast to the Lawyer’s Duty of Confidentiality
1.36
1.37
F Document Production Process in International Arbitration
1.38
1.39
1.40
1.41
1.42
1.43
Part 1 Comparative Overview of Concepts of Attorney–Client Privilege
Preliminary Material
P1.01
P1.02
P1.03
P1.04
P1.05
P1.06
2 United States of America
Preliminary Material
2.01
2.02
I Course of a Lawsuit
2.03
2.04
2.05
2.06
II Taking of Evidence in Civil Litigation
2.07
2.08
2.09
A Required Disclosures
2.10
2.11
B Pre-trial Discovery
2.12
2.13
1 Scope of pre-trial discovery
2.14
2 Discovery methods
2.15
a) Depositions
2.16
2.17
2.18
2.19
2.20
2.21
2.22
b) Interrogatories
2.23
2.24
2.25
2.26
2.27
2.28
c) Production of documents
2.29
2.30
2.31
3 Supplementary discovery
2.32
4 Objections to pre-trial discovery
2.33
2.34
2.35
2.36
5 Motion to compel and sanctions
2.37
2.38
C Witness Examination at Trial
2.39
2.40
2.41
III Attorney–Client Privilege
2.42
2.43
2.44
2.45
A Purpose and Rationale
2.46
B Invocation
2.47
C Scope
2.48
1 Scope ratione personae
2.49
a) Lawyer
2.50
2.51
2.52
b) Client
2.53
2.54
2.55
2.56
c) Agents
2.57
2 Scope ratione materiae
2.58
a) Communications
2.59
2.60
2.61
b) Confidentiality
2.62
c) Purpose of seeking legal advice or assistance
2.63
3 Scope ratione temporis
2.64
2.65
D Exceptions
2.66
1 Crime-fraud exception
2.67
2 Fiduciary exception
2.68
2.69
E Waiver
2.70
2.71
2.72
2.73
2.74
2.75
2.76
IV Work-Product Protection
2.77
2.78
2.79
2.80
2.81
2.82
2.83
2.84
3 England and Wales
Preliminary Material
3.01
I The Woolf Reform and the Civil Procedure Rules
3.02
3.03
II Course of a Lawsuit
3.04
3.05
3.06
3.07
3.08
3.09
3.10
III Taking of Evidence in Civil Litigation
3.11
A Disclosure and Inspection of Documents
3.12
1 Disclosure and inspection of documents by parties
3.13
3.14
a) Disclosure
3.15
3.16
i) Pre-action disclosure
3.17
3.18
ii) Pre-trial disclosure
3.19
3.20
3.21
3.22
3.23
3.24
3.25
iii) Supplementary disclosure
3.26
b) Inspection
3.27
3.28
3.29
c) Non-compliance with disclosure or inspection order
3.30
2 Disclosure and inspection of documents and third parties
3.31
a) Pre-trial disclosure and inspection under CPR 31.17
3.32
3.33
b) Witness summons
3.34
3.35
3.36
B Witness Examination at Trial
3.37
3.38
3.39
3.40
3.41
IV Legal Professional Privilege
3.42
3.43
A Rationale
3.44
1 Legal advice privilege
3.45
3.46
3.47
2 Litigation privilege
3.48
B Invocation
3.49
C Scope
3.50
3.51
3.52
3.53
1 Scope ratione personae
3.54
a) Lawyer
3.55
3.56
3.57
3.58
3.59
b) Client
3.60
c) Agent
3.61
2 Scope ratione materiae
3.62
a) Legal advice privilege
3.63
i) Communications
3.64
3.65
ii) Confidentiality
3.66
3.67
3.68
iii) Purpose of seeking or rendering legal advice
3.69
b) Litigation privilege
3.70
3.71
i) Communications
3.72
3.73
3.74
ii) Confidentiality
3.75
iii) Litigation
3.76
iv) Litigation pending or in contemplation
3.77
v) Dominant purpose test
3.78
3.79
3 Scope ratione temporis
3.80
3.81
D Exceptions
3.82
1 Crime-fraud exception
3.83
3.84
3.85
3.86
2 Statutory exceptions
3.87
3.88
E Waiver
3.89
3.90
3.91
3.92
3.93
3.94
3.95
4 Germany
Preliminary Material
4.01
4.02
I Course of a Lawsuit
4.03
4.04
4.05
4.06
II Taking of Evidence in Civil Litigation
4.07
4.08
A Witness Examination
4.09
4.10
4.11
4.12
B Party Interrogation
4.13
4.14
4.15
C Production of Documents
4.16
1 Production of documents by parties
4.17
4.18
a) Sections 421 ff of the Code of Civil Procedure
4.19
4.20
4.21
4.22
4.23
b) Section 142 of the Code of Civil Procedure
4.24
4.25
4.26
i) Documents and other records
4.27
ii) Possession
4.28
iii) Reference
4.29
iv) Specificity of the reference
4.30
4.31
v) Further unwritten requirements
4.32
vi) Discretion
4.33
vii) Non-compliance with production order
4.34
2 Production of documents by third parties
4.35
a) Section 428 Alt. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure
4.36
4.37
4.38
b) Sections 428 Alt. 2, 142(1)(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure
4.39
4.40
4.41
4.42
c) Section 142 of the Code of Civil Procedure
4.43
4.44
III Attorney–Client Privilege
4.45
A Purpose and Rationale
4.46
4.47
B Invocation
4.48
4.49
4.50
4.51
1 Analogous application of the right to refuse to give testimony contained in Section 383(1) No 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure
4.52
4.53
2 Analogous application of criminal procedural law
4.54
4.55
4.56
4.57
3 Interpretation in conformity with the Basic Law
4.58
4.59
C Scope
4.60
4.61
4.62
4.63
4.64
1 Scope ratione personae
4.65
4.66
4.67
4.68
2 Scope ratione materiae
4.69
4.70
4.71
4.72
4.73
3 Scope ratione temporis
4.74
D Exceptions
4.75
4.76
E Waiver
4.77
4.78
4.79
4.80
4.81
5 European Union
Preliminary Material
5.01
5.02
I Investigative Powers of the European Commission
5.03
5.04
5.05
5.06
A Requests for Information Pursuant to Article 18 of Regulation 1/2003
5.07
5.08
5.09
5.10
B Inspections Pursuant to Article 20 of Regulation 1/2003
5.11
5.12
5.13
5.14
5.15
5.16
C Inspections Pursuant to Article 21 of Regulation 1/2003
5.17
5.18
5.19
5.20
D General Inquiries Pursuant to Article 17 of Regulation 1/2003
5.21
5.22
5.23
II Attorney–Client Privilege
5.24
A Scope
5.25
1 Scope ratione personae
5.26
5.27
5.28
2 Scope ratione materiae
5.29
5.30
3 Scope ratione temporis
5.31
B Waiver
5.32
6 Comparison—Similarities and Differences in the Laws on Attorney–Client Privilege
Preliminary Material
6.01
6.02
6.03
I Purpose and Rationale
6.04
II Invocation
6.05
6.06
III Scope ratione personae
A Lawyer
6.07
6.08
6.09
6.10
B Client
6.11
6.12
6.13
C Agent
6.14
D Third Persons
6.15
IV Scope ratione materiae
A Communication versus Information
6.16
6.17
B Confidentiality
6.18
6.19
6.20
C For the Purpose of Seeking Legal Advice
6.21
6.22
V Scope ratione temporis
6.23
6.24
VI Exceptions
6.25
VII Waiver
6.26
6.27
6.28
6.29
6.30
VIII Work-Product Protection
6.31
6.32
6.33
6.34
6.35
6.36
6.37
6.38
IX Conclusion
6.39
6.40
6.41
Part 2 Determining the Applicable Attorney–Client Privilege Standard
Preliminary Material
P2.01
7 Seeking Inspiration from Judicial and Administrative Proceedings for the Arbitral Context
Preliminary Material
7.01
7.02
7.03
7.04
7.05
7.06
7.07
I National Civil Court Proceedings
A United States of America
7.08
1 Interstate conflict of laws
7.09
7.10
7.11
7.12
a) Law applicable to the substance of the dispute
7.13
7.14
7.15
7.16
b) Privilege law of the forum state
7.17
7.18
c) Conflict-of-laws rules of the state in which the court sits
7.19
7.20
i) Restatement (First) of Conflict of Laws
7.21
7.22
7.23
7.24
7.25
7.26
ii) Governmental interest analysis
7.27
7.28
7.29
7.30
7.31
7.32
7.33
7.34
7.35
7.36
7.37
7.38
7.39
iii) ‘Most significant relationship’ test of the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws
7.40
7.41
7.42
iv) ‘Centre of gravity’ test
7.43
7.44
7.45
v) Section 139 of the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws
7.46
7.47
7.48
7.49
7.50
7.51
7.52
vi) ‘Better law’ approach
7.53
7.54
7.55
vii) Reasonable reliance test
7.56
7.57
7.58
viii) Territorial solution: Application of the law of the state in which the lawyer practises
7.59
7.60
7.61
d) Summary
7.62
7.63
7.64
7.65
7.66
7.67
7.68
2 International conflict of laws
7.69
7.70
7.71
7.72
7.73
a) Non-recognition of privilege for foreign legal professionals
7.74
7.75
7.76
b) ‘Touch base’ test
7.77
7.78
7.79
7.80
7.81
c) Modified ‘touch base’ test
7.82
d) Functional approach
7.83
7.84
7.85
e) Summary
7.86
7.87
7.88
B Germany
7.89
7.90
7.91
1 The lex fori principle
7.92
7.93
7.94
2 The lex fori governs attorney–client privilege
7.95
7.96
7.97
7.98
7.99
7.100
7.101
II EU Competition Law Investigations
7.102
7.103
7.104
7.105
7.106
7.107
7.108
7.109
7.110
III Judicial Assistance Proceedings
7.111
A Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters of 1970
7.112
7.113
7.114
7.115
7.116
7.117
B Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001
7.118
7.119
7.120
7.121
7.122
IV Summary
7.123
7.124
7.125
7.126
7.127
7.128
7.129
8 Applicable Privilege Standard in International Commercial Arbitration
Preliminary Material
8.01
8.02
8.03
8.04
I Party Autonomy
8.05
8.06
8.07
8.08
8.09
8.10
8.11
II Characterization of Attorney–Client Privilege as Procedural
8.12
8.13
8.14
8.15
8.16
8.17
8.18
8.19
8.20
8.21
8.22
8.23
8.24
8.25
III Legal Framework for Attorney–Client Privilege in International Commercial Arbitration Proceedings
8.26
8.27
A National Arbitration Legislation
8.28
8.29
B UNCITRAL Rules and Institutional Arbitration Rules
8.30
8.31
8.32
8.33
8.34
8.35
C IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration
8.36
8.37
8.38
8.39
8.40
8.41
8.42
D Conclusion
8.43
IV Constraints on the Arbitral Tribunal’s Discretion
8.44
A International Mandatory Rules of Law
8.45
8.46
8.47
8.48
8.49
8.50
8.51
8.52
B Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards under the New York Convention
8.53
8.54
8.55
8.56
8.57
8.58
8.59
8.60
8.61
8.62
8.63
1 First scenario: the arbitral tribunal rejects the application of attorney–client privilege in total
8.64
8.65
8.66
8.67
8.68
2 Second scenario: the arbitral tribunal applies such a high standard of attorney–client privilege that the parties are virtually unable to present their case
8.69
8.70
8.71
8.72
8.73
8.74
8.75
8.76
3 Third scenario: the arbitral tribunal adopts an attorney–client privilege standard different from that of the place of enforcement
8.77
8.78
8.79
8.80
8.81
8.82
V Possible Solutions to Determine the Applicable Attorney–Client Privilege Standard
8.83
A General Principles of Law
8.84
8.85
8.86
8.87
8.88
8.89
8.90
8.91
8.92
B Choice-of-Law Approaches Leading to the Application of a Single National Law
8.93
8.94
8.95
8.96
8.97
8.98
8.99
1 Interest analysis
8.100
8.101
8.102
8.103
2 Touch base test
8.104
8.105
8.106
3 Section 139 of the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws
8.107
4 Functional approach
8.108
5 Closest connection test
8.109
8.110
8.111
8.112
8.113
8.114
8.115
a) Seat of arbitration
8.116
8.117
8.118
8.119
8.120
8.121
b) Law governing the merits of the dispute
8.122
8.123
c) Place where the communication took place
8.124
8.125
8.126
8.127
d) Place where the document was created or received
8.128
8.129
8.130
e) Place where the document is stored
8.131
8.132
8.133
f) Law applicable to the contract of retainer between lawyer and client
8.134
8.135
g) Place where the lawyer with whom the communication took place is admitted to the bar or practises
8.136
8.137
8.138
8.139
8.140
8.141
8.142
8.143
h) Domicile of the party claiming privilege
8.144
8.145
8.146
i) Comparison and conclusion
8.147
8.148
8.149
8.150
8.151
8.152
8.153
8.154
8.155
8.156
8.157
8.158
8.159
8.160
C Cumulative Application of Several National Laws
8.161
8.162
8.163
8.164
D Autonomous Standard
8.165
8.166
8.167
8.168
8.169
8.170
8.171
8.172
8.173
8.174
8.175
8.176
E Comparison of Possible Solutions
8.177
8.178
8.179
8.180
8.181
8.182
VI Corrective Measures
8.183
8.184
8.185
8.186
8.187
A Lowest Common Denominator Approach
8.188
8.189
8.190
8.191
8.192
8.193
8.194
8.195
B Most Protective Rule
8.196
8.197
8.198
8.199
8.200
8.201
8.202
8.203
8.204
VII Conclusion
8.205
8.206
8.207
8.208
8.209
8.210
8.211
8.212
8.213
8.214
8.215
9 Applicable Privilege Standard in Investor–State Arbitration and Comparison with International Commercial Arbitration
Preliminary Material
9.01
9.02
9.03
9.04
9.05
9.06
9.07
I Arbitrations under NAFTA Chapter Eleven
9.08
A SD Myers, Inc v Canada
9.09
9.10
B Pope & Talbot v Canada
9.11
9.12
C United Parcel Service of America, Inc v Canada
9.13
9.14
9.15
9.16
D Glamis Gold Ltd v United States
9.17
9.18
9.19
9.20
9.21
9.22
9.23
E Merrill & Ring Forestry LP v The Government of Canada
9.24
9.25
9.26
9.27
F Vito G Gallo v Canada
9.28
9.29
9.30
9.31
G Bilcon of Delaware et al v Government of Canada
9.32
9.33
9.34
9.35
9.36
9.37
9.38
9.39
9.40
9.41
H Apotex Holdings Inc and Apotex Inc v United States of America
9.42
9.43
9.44
9.45
9.46
9.47
9.48
I St Marys VCNA, LLC v The Government of Canada
9.49
9.50
9.51
9.52
J Windstream Energy LLC v Government of Canada
9.53
9.54
9.55
9.56
9.57
II Arbitrations under Bilateral Investment Treaties and National Investment Laws
9.58
A Biwater Gauff (Tanzania) Ltd v United Republic of Tanzania
9.59
9.60
B Philip Morris Asia Limited v the Commonwealth of Australia
9.61
9.62
9.63
9.64
9.65
9.66
C Caratube International Oil Company LLP and Devincci Salah Hourani v Republic of Kazakhstan
9.67
9.68
9.69
9.70
9.71
III Conclusion and Comparison with International Commercial Arbitration
9.72
9.73
9.74
9.75
9.76
9.77
9.78
9.79
9.80
9.81
9.82
9.83
Part 3 Devising Rules for Attorney–Client Privilege in International Arbitration: A Draft Proposal
10 Devising Rules for Attorney–Client Privilege in International Arbitration: A Draft Proposal
Preliminary Material
10.01
I Desirability of Further Rules for Attorney–Client Privilege in International Arbitration
10.02
10.03
10.04
10.05
10.06
10.07
10.08
10.09
10.10
10.11
II Type and Content of Proposed Rules for Attorney–Client Privilege in International Arbitration
10.12
A Appropriate Type of Rules
10.13
1 Substantive rules
10.14
10.15
10.16
10.17
10.18
2 Conflict-of-laws rules
10.19
10.20
10.21
10.22
3 Hybrid rules
10.23
10.24
B Content of Proposed Hybrid Rules
10.25
1 Substantive part
10.26
10.27
10.28
10.29
10.30
10.31
10.32
10.33
10.34
10.35
10.36
10.37
10.38
10.39
10.40
2 Conflict-of-laws part
10.41
10.42
10.43
10.44
III Appropriate Instrument to Implement Proposed Rules for Attorney–Client Privilege in International Arbitration
10.45
10.46
A Need for an Instrument that Deals with the Taking of Evidence
10.47
10.48
10.49
10.50
10.51
10.52
10.53
10.54
10.55
10.56
10.57
10.58
B Need for an Instrument Consisting of Rules
10.59
10.60
10.61
10.62
C Need for Predictability and Certainty
10.63
10.64
10.65
10.66
10.67
10.68
IV Draft Proposal
10.69
10.70
10.71
10.72
10.73
10.74
10.75
11 Conclusions and Outlook
11.01
Comparative Overview of Concepts of Attorney–Client Privilege
11.02
11.03
Applicable Attorney–Client Privilege Standard in Judicial and Administrative Proceedings
11.04
11.05
11.06
11.07
11.08
Applicable Attorney–Client Privilege Standard in International Commercial Arbitration
11.09
11.10
11.11
11.12
11.13
Applicable Attorney–Client Privilege Standard in Investor–State Arbitration
11.14
11.15
11.16
Proposed Rules for Attorney–Client Privilege in International Arbitration
11.17
11.18
11.19
11.20
11.21
11.22
Outlook
11.23
11.24
11.25
Further Material
Bibliography
Index
Sign up for alerts
Index
From:
Attorney-Client Privilege in International Arbitration
Annabelle Möckesch
Content type:
Book content
Product:
International Commercial Arbitration [ICMA]
Series:
Oxford International Arbitration Series
Published in print:
26 January 2017
ISBN:
9780198795865
Prev
|
Next
Close
Go to full text on:
EUR-Lex
External Link
Oxford Law Citator
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please,
subscribe
or
login
to access all content.
[3.231.229.89]
3.231.229.89