IBA Guidelines on Conflict of Interest in Intl Arbitration_EC
Correct misalignment Change languages order
IBA Guidelines on Conflict of Interest in Intl Arbitration Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in Intl Arbitration_e.pdf (English)IBA Guidelines on Conflict of Interest in Intl Arbitration Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in Intl Arbitration_c.pdf (Chinese)
IBA Guidelines on  Conlficts of Interest  in International  ArbitrationA Note on Translations
Adopted by resolution  of the IBA Council  on Thursday 23 October 2014 International Bar Association 4th Floor, 10 St Bride Street London EC4A 4AD United KingdomThis document was originally prepared in English by a working group of the International Bar Association and was adopted by IBA  Council Resolution.
Tel: +44 (0)20 7842 0090 Fax: +44 (0)20 7842 0091 www.ibanet.org ISBN: 978-0-948711-36-7 All Rights Reserved  © International Bar Association 2014In the event of any inconsistency between the English language versions and the translations into any other language, the English  language version shall prevail.
No part of the material protected by this copyright  notice may be reproduced or utilised in any form or  by any means, electronic or mechanical, including  photocopying, recording, or any information storage  and retrieval system, without written permission from the  copyright owner.The IBA would like to acknowledge the work of Dingmin (Lear) Liu and Yupeng (Yves P) Hu of WunschArb, and Clarisse von Wunschheim of WunschArb, in translating and reviewing these Guidelines respectively. International Bar Association  4th Floor, 10 St Bride Street  London EC4A 4AD  United Kingdom
Contents IBA Guidelines on Conlficts of Interest in International Arbitration 2014 iTel: +44 (0)20 7842 0090  Fax: +44 (0)20 7842 0091 www.ibanet.org 1
Introduction 1译文仅供参考。
Part I: General Standards Regarding Impartiality,如有不一致,应以本指引英文本为准。 国际律师协会 国际仲裁当事人代理指引
Independence and Disclosure 4国际律师协会理事会 2013年 5 月 25 日通过
Part II: Practical Application of the General Standards 17国际律师协会及其仲裁委员会衷心感谢北京希家瑞裁咨询有限公司
i(WunschArb) 对本指引的翻译。
IBA Guidelines on Conlficts of Interest in International Arbitration 2014This translation is an unofficial version of the Guidelines.
Since their issuance in 2004, the IBA Guidelines on Conlficts of Interest in International Arbitration  (the ‘Guidelines’)As the English version is  the original text, the English version should prevail in the case of any discrepancy. 目录
工作组成员 关于仲裁委员会 指引 前言 定义
指引的适用 当事人代理 与仲裁员的沟通 向仲裁庭提交的书状 信息交换与出示
1 have gained wide acceptance within the international arbitration community. Arbitrators commonly use the Guidelines when  making decisions about prospective appointments  and disclosures. Likewise, parties and their counsel  frequently consider the Guidelines in assessing the  impartiality and independence of arbitrators, and  arbitral institutions and courts also often consult the  Guidelines in considering challenges to arbitrators.证人与专家 不当行为的救济 工作组成员    Alexis Mourre Co-Chair, IBA Arbitration Committee Castaldi Mourre & Partners Paris, France    Eduardo Zuleta Co-Chair, IBA Arbitration Committee Gómez-Pinzón Zuleta Bogotá, Colombia    Julie Bédard Chair, Task Force Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP New York, New York, United States    Funke Adekoya Áelex Falomo Ikoyi, Lagos, Nigeria    José María Alonso Baker & McKenzie Madrid, Spain    Cyrus Benson Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP London, United Kingdom    Louis Degos K & L Gates LLP Paris, France    Paul Friedland White & Case LLP New York, New York, United States    Mark Friedman Co-Chair, IBA Arbitration Committee 2011–2012 Debevoise & Plimpton LLP New York, New York, United States
As contemplated when the Guidelines were ifrst  adopted, on the eve of their tenth anniversary it was  considered appropriate to relfect on the accumulated  experience of using them and to identify areas of  possible clariifcation or improvement. Accordingly,  in 2012, the IBA Arbitration Committee initiated  a review of the Guidelines, which was conducted by  an expanded Conlficts of Interest Subcommittee  (the ‘Subcommittee’), 2 representing diverse legalJudith Gill QC  Co-Chair, IBA Arbitration Committee 2010–2011 Allen & Overy LLP London, United Kingdom    Christopher Lau Maxwell Chambers Singapore    Laurent Levy Levy Kaufmann-Kohler Geneva, Switzerland    Torsten Lorcher CMS Hasche Sigle Cologne, Germany    Fernando Mantilla-Serrano Shearman & Sterling LLP Paris, France    Yoshimi Ohara Nagashima Ohno & Tsunematsu, Tokyo, Japan    William Park Boston University School of Law Boston, Massachusetts, United States    Kenneth Reisenfeld Patton Boggs LLP Washington, DC, United States    Catherine Rogers Penn State, The Dickinson School of Law University Park, Pennsylvania, United States    Arman Sarvarian University of Surrey, School of Law Guildford, United Kingdom    Anne-Véronique Schlaepfer Schellenberg Wittmer Geneva, Switzerland
1 The 2004 Guidelines were drafted by a Working Group of  19 experts: Henri Alvarez, Canada; John Beechey, England; Jim Carter, United States;Margrete Stevens King & Spalding, LLP Washington, DC, United States    Claus von Wobeser Co-Chair, IBA Arbitration Committee 2005–2006 Von Wobeser y Sierra, SC  México DF, México    Alvin Yeo Wong Partnership LLP Singapore
Emmanuel Gaillard, France;关于仲裁委员会    1.
Emilio Gonzales de Castilla, Mexico;仲裁委员会是国际律师协会设立于法律实务部们下的专门委员会,主要关注跨国争议仲 裁相关的法律、实践及程序。
Bernard Hanotiau,  Belgium;该委员会目前拥有来自 115 个国家的 2641 名成员,其数
Michael Hwang, Singapore;量还在稳步增长。 2.
Albert Jan van den  Berg, Belgium;仲裁委员会通过出版刊物及举行会议,分享国际仲裁信息,促进对仲裁的使用以及增进 仲裁的效率性。
Doug Jones, Australia;3.
Gabrielle  Kaufmann-Kohler, Switzerland; Arthur Marriott, England; Tore Wiwen Nilsson, Sweden;仲裁委员会已出版了数套规则与指引,并被仲裁界广泛接受为最佳仲裁实践的体现,例 如《国际律师协会国际仲裁取证规则》(2010 年修正)、《国际律师协会国际仲裁利益冲 突指引》(修订中)、《国际律师协会国际仲裁条款起草准则》。
Hilmar Raeschke-Kessler,  Germany;仲裁委员会每隔一年出版 一期通讯,并在全球组织会议、研讨会和培训课程。
David W Rivkin, United States;4.
Klaus Sachs,  Germany;仲裁委员会设有常务委员会,并酌情针对具体问题设立工作组。
Nathalie Voser, Switzerland (Rapporteur); David  Williams, New Zealand; Des Williams, South Africa;5. 仲裁委员会在发行本《指引 》时 设有律师行为规范工作组之外的三个分会,分别为投资 协定仲裁 分会、利益冲突分会、以及青年仲裁执业者分会。
and  Otto de Witt Wijnen, The Netherlands (Chair).指引    前言    国际律师协会仲裁委员会于 2008 年建立了国际仲裁律师行为工作组(‘工作组’)。
2 The members of the expanded Subcommittee on Conlficts of Interest were: Habib Almulla, United Arab Emirates;工作组的职能 是专注于国际仲裁中的律师行为及当事人代理活动 中,由于各种受制于或受到 不同乃至可能相互冲突的规则和规范影响而产生的各种问题。
David Arias, Spain (Co-Chair); Julie Bédard, cultures and a range of perspectives, including  counsel, arbitrators and arbitration users.作为初步探究,工作组考察 了这些不同的规范与实践是否会减损 国际仲裁程序的根本公平和公正 ,以及关于国际仲 裁当事人代理的指引能否帮助当事人、律师 和仲裁员 。
The  Subcommittee was chaired by David Arias, later  co-chaired by Julie Bédard, and the review process was  conducted under the leadership of Pierre Bienvenu  and Bernard Hanotiau.在 2010 年工作组为研究上述问题 发起的一项调查中,参与调查的人员表示了对进一步发展完善当事人代理国际 指引的支持。 工作组于 2012 年 10 月向国际律师协会仲裁委员会工作人员提交了指引草案。
While the Guidelines were originally intended to  apply to both commercial and investment arbitration,  it was found in the course of the review process  that uncertainty lingered as to their application to  investment arbitration.仲裁委员会随 后审阅了草案,并向经验丰富的仲裁执业者、仲裁员及仲裁机构征求了意见。 之后,指引 草 案被提交给国际律师协会仲裁委员会全体会员进行审议。 与律师们熟悉且遵循单一职业行为规范的国内司法环境不同,国际仲裁中当事人之代理人可 能会受到多种有潜在冲突的国内规则和规范的约束。
Similarly, despite a comment  in the original version of the Guidelines that their  application extended to non-legal professionals serving  as arbitrator, there appeared to remain uncertainty in  this regard as well.这些规则和规范可能是当事人之代理人 所在法律 体系 、仲裁地、仲裁庭审地的规则和规范。 本次调查显示了仲裁被申请人对国际仲 裁适用的当事人代理规则的高度不确定。 当来自不同法律体系的律师由于身处同一律所或由 于与共同代理而一起工作时,会受到多个有着冲突的规则和规范的法律体系的约束,这无疑 使前述问题更加混乱。
A consensus emerged in favour of a  general afifrmation that the Guidelines apply to both  commercial and investment arbitration, and to both  legal and non-legal professionals serving as arbitrator.除了潜在的不确定性之外,适用于国内法庭诉讼的规则和规范也不能很好的适用于国际仲裁 程。 诚然,国际仲裁已经发展了适应不同参与者法律文化差异以及复杂跨国性质争议的实践 和程序。
The Subcommittee has carefully considered a number  of issues that have received attention in international  arbitration practice since 2004, such as the effects of  so-called ‘advance waivers’, whether the fact of acting  concurrently as counsel and arbitrator in unrelated  cases raising similar legal issues warrants disclosure,  ‘issue’ conlficts, the independence and impartiality  of arbitral or administrative secretaries and thirdparty funding.相比之下,国内的专业行为规则和规范主要适用于与其国内程序相一致的特定法律 文化。 《国际律师协会国际仲裁代理指引 》(本‘指引’) 受到以下原则的启发:当事人之代理人应 当公正、正直 地行事,并不得参与包括阻碍仲裁程序的策略在内的导致额外延误或产生不必 要费用的活动。 如同国际律师协会在 2011 年 5 月 28 日通过的《国际律师执业行为指引》一样,本指引并非 旨在取代强制性法律,职业 或纪律规定,或当事人之间约定的有关于或适用于当事人代理事 宜的仲裁规则。
The revised Guidelines relfect the  Subcommittee’s conclusions on these issues.本指引 也非意在向仲裁庭授予本该由律师协会或其他职业团体享有的权力。
United States (Co-Chair);使用‘指引’而非‘规则’一词,旨在强调其契约属性。
José Astigarraga, United States;当事人因此可以同意选用全部指引 或其部分。
Pierre Bienvenu, Canada (Review Process Co-Chair);若仲裁庭在遵照有约束力的强制性法律自由裁量后认定可以适用本指引,则可在 其自由裁量后决定是否适用本指引 。
KarlHeinz Böckstiegel, Germany;本指引无意限制国际仲裁内在的、拥有巨大优势的灵活性,当事人及仲裁庭可以视仲裁案件 具体情况修改指引 的内容。
Yves Derains, France; Teresa  Giovannini, Switzerland;定义    《国际律师协会国际仲裁代理指引 》中,    ‘仲裁庭’是指仲裁中的一名独任仲裁员或由多名仲裁员组成的小组;
Eduardo Damião Gonçalves, Brazil;‘仲裁员’是指仲裁中的仲裁员;
Bernard Hanotiau, Belgium (Review Process Co-Chair);‘文件材料’是指以纸面、电子、音频、视频 或任何其他方式记录或保留的各类文字、通讯 、 图片、图画、程序或数据;
Paula Hodges, England;‘国内律师协会’或‘律师协会’是指全国或地方主管律师职业行为的部门;
Toby Landau, England;‘证据’是指书证及书面和口头的证词;
Christian  Leathley, England; Carole Malinvaud, France;‘单方交流’是指一方当事人之代理人与仲裁员或备选 的仲裁员在对方当事人不在场或不知 情的情况下进行的口头或书面的交流;
Ciccu  Mukhopadhaya, India;‘专家’是指就一方当事人或仲裁庭认定的特定问题向仲裁庭提供专家分析及意见的个人或 组织;
Yoshimi Ohara, Japan;‘专家报告’是指专家的书面陈述;
Tinuade  Oyekunle, Nigeria;‘《指引 》’是指《国际律师协会国际仲裁代理指引》,及其修正版;
Eun Young Park, Korea;‘故意’是指对存疑的事实有实际的知晓;
Constantine  Partasides, England;‘不当行为’是指违反《指引》或 其它 仲裁庭认定为有违当事人之代理人之义务的行为;
Peter Rees, The Netherlands;‘当事人’是指参加仲裁的一方;
Anke  Sessler, Germany;‘当事人提名之仲裁员’是指由一个或多个当事人提名或指定的仲裁员;
Guido Tawil, Argentina; Jingzhou Tao,  China; Gäetan Verhoosel, England (Rapporteur);‘当事人之代理人’或‘代理人’是指 代表 任何以一方当事人,且 非以证人或专家身份参加 仲裁并向仲裁庭提交书状、进行论证或做出陈述的个人,不论其是否具有国内律师资格,且 可以是一方当事人的雇员且;
Nathalie  Voser, Switzerland;‘首席仲裁员’是指独任仲裁员或仲裁庭主席;
Nassib Ziadé, United Arab Emirates;‘出示申请’是指一方当事人向另一方当事人提出的出示文件材料的书面申请;
and  Alexis Mourre.‘证人’是指 出庭 向仲裁庭提供事实证言的个人;
Assistance was provided by: Niuscha Bassiri,  Belgium;‘证人证言’是指 记载了证人证言的书面陈述。
Alison Fitzgerald, Canada;《指引》的适用   1.
Oliver Cojo, Spain;如经各方当事人同意适用,则本指引 全部或在当事人合意范围内适用;
and  Ricardo Dalmaso Marques, Brazil.或如仲裁庭认为 有权裁决 当事人代理事宜以确保仲裁程序的公正 与公平,经征询当事人意见后,适用本
ii iii指引。 2.
The Subcommittee has also considered, in view of  the evolution of the global practice of international  arbitration, whether the revised Guidelines should  impose stricter standards in regard to arbitrator  disclosure.一旦对本指引 解释 产生 争议,应由仲裁庭依照指引 制定目的以对具体仲裁案件最适宜的 方式进行解释。 3. 本指引并非旨在取代当事人代理事宜方面的相关强制性法律、职业或纪律规定,或当事 人同意适用的仲裁规则。
The revised Guidelines relfect the  conclusion that, while the basic approach of the 2004  Guidelines should not be altered, disclosure should be  required in certain circumstances not contemplated in  the 2004 Guidelines.本指引也并非旨在减损 仲裁协议或损害 一方 当事人之代理人对 其当事人的首要忠实义务或代其当事人向仲裁庭陈述案情的重要义务。 对指引第 1-3 条的评论    如前言中所阐释,关于 当事人代理事宜,尤其在处理不同的规范 及期望差别有损仲裁程序的 公正与公平时,当事人及仲裁庭可以从相关的指引获益。
It is also essential to reafifrm that  the fact of requiring disclosure – or of an arbitrator  making a disclosure – does not imply the existence of  doubts as to the impartiality or independence of the  arbitrator.凭借本指引,仲裁庭在处理此类问题时,在满足 强制性法律的前提下,无须受制于通过冲突 法规则或国际私法规则分析来选择国内 或当地的法律职业规范的窠臼。 本 指引可以提供 解释 国际仲裁程序多元性的一种方法。 本指引应当在当事人同意的时候及范围内适用。
Indeed, the standard for disclosure differs  from the standard for challenge.当事人可以在签订仲裁协议或之后的任何时 候选择适用本指引 的全部或部分。
Similarly, the revised  Guidelines are not in any way intended to discourage  the service as arbitrators of lawyers practising in large  ifrms or legal associations.为了确保仲裁程序的公正与公平,仲裁庭在决定其有权裁决 当事人代理事宜后,也可适用本 指引或从中汲取灵感。 仲裁庭做出 该裁决之前应当给予各方当事人陈述观点的机会。
The Guidelines were adopted by resolution of the  IBA Council on Thursday 23 October 2014.本指引并未规定仲裁庭是否有权对当事人代理事宜做出裁决 ,亦未规定当事人缺乏合意的前 提下可否适用本指引。
The  Guidelines are available for download at: www.ibanet. org/Publications/publications_IBA_guides_and_ free_materials.aspx本 指引对上述问题未予以 承认也未排除。 仲裁庭有权对其是否有权对 当事人代理事宜及指引 适用作出决定。 一方当事人之代理人,在 其授权范围内,以当事人名义参与仲裁。
Signed by the Co-Chairs of the Arbitration Committee  Thursday 23 October 2014因此,一方当事人之代理 人所承受的义务或责任也是其所承受的义务或责任,代理人的不当代理行为可能最终须由该 当事人承受。
Eduardo Zuleta4.
Paul Friedland iv当事人之代理人应当尽早向对方当事人及仲裁庭表明自己的身份。
1 Introduction如若 代理事宜有任何 改变,一方当事人应当立即通知仲裁庭及对方当事人。
1.5.
Arbitrators and party representatives are often  unsure about the scope of their disclosure  obligations.仲裁庭一旦组成后,任何与 某位仲裁员之间具有导致 利益冲突关系的个人,均不得接受 代理一方当事人参与仲裁,除非其他当事人在其适当披露后均无异议。 10
The growth of international  business, including larger corporate groups and  international law ifrms, has generated more  disclosures and resulted in increased complexity  in the analysis of disclosure and conlfict of interest  issues.6. 如有违反上述第 5 条规则之情形,仲裁庭可以采取适当措施,包括排除一方当事人的新 任代理人参与全部或部分仲裁程序,以保障仲裁程序的公正 。 对指引第 4-6 条的评论
Parties have more opportunities to use  challenges of arbitrators to delay arbitrations, or  to deny the opposing party the arbitrator of its  choice.仲裁过程中当事人代理的变更可能会由于新任代理人与一名或多名仲裁员之间存在利益冲 突而影响到仲裁程序的公正 。
Disclosure of any relationship, no matter  how minor or serious, may lead to unwarranted  or frivolous challenges.在此情形下,仲裁庭可以在情况确证紧急且有必要权限时,考 虑排除一方当事人的新任代理人参与全部或部分仲裁程序。
At the same time, it  is important that more information be made  available to the parties, so as to protect awards  against challenges based upon alleged failures  to disclose, and to promote a level playing ifeld  among parties and among counsel engaged in  international arbitration.在评估是否存在利益冲突时,仲 裁庭得依照《国际律师协会国际仲裁利益冲突指引》的规定。 在采取上述措施之前,仲裁庭最好 给予当事人对是否存在利益冲突、仲裁庭对此冲突的处理 权限以及仲裁庭采取之措施 的后果等发表意见的机会。 与仲裁员的交流
2.7.
Parties, arbitrators, institutions and courts face  complex decisions about the information that  arbitrators should disclose and the standards to  apply to disclosure.非经各方当事人同意或属于下述例外,一方当事人之代理人不得与仲裁员就仲裁进行任 何的单方交流。 8. 在下述情形下,一方当事人之代理人进行单方交流并无不当:
In addition, institutions and  courts face dififcult decisions when an objection  or a challenge is made after a disclosure.(1) 一方当事人之代理人可与备选的当事人提名之仲裁员进行交流以判断他/她的专长、 经验、能力、时间安排、意愿及可能存在的利益冲突。
There is  a tension between, on the one hand, the parties’  right to disclosure of circumstances that may  call into question an arbitrator’s impartiality or  independence in order to protect the parties’  right to a fair hearing, and, on the other hand,  the need to avoid unnecessary challenges against  arbitrators in order to protect the parties’ ability  to select arbitrators of their choosing. 3.(2) 一方当事人之代理人可为了选任首席仲裁员而与备选的或已经任命的当事人提名之 仲裁员进行交流。 (3) 一方当事人之代理人可在各方当事人同意前提下,与备选的首席仲裁员进行交流以 判断他/她的专长、经验、能力、时间安排、意愿及可能存在的利益冲突。 (4) 在与备选的当事人提名之仲裁员或首席仲裁员交流时,其交流内容可包含对争议的 概括性描述,一方当事人之代理人不得要求备选的当事人提名之仲裁员对争议的实 体问题发表意见。
It is in the interest of the international arbitration  community that arbitration proceedings are  not hindered by ill-founded challenges against  arbitrators and that the legitimacy of the  process is not affected by uncertainty and a lack  of uniformity in the applicable standards for disclosures, objections and challenges.本指引第 7-8 条规定了当事人之代理人与仲裁员或潜在仲裁员针对仲裁事宜进行交流的事 项。 本指引旨在反映最好的国际实践,有鉴于此,可能有别于不同国家的更严格抑或宽松的国内 实践。 如在本指引中所定义的,单方交流仅能在特定情形下进行,当事人之代理人应尽量避免。
The 2004  Guidelines relfected the view that the standards  existing at the time lacked sufifcient clarity and  uniformity in their application.本 指引并未确定单方交流的起始和截止时间。 单方交流的范围包括在仲裁庭组成过程或与仲裁 庭组成相关的任何交流。
The Guidelines,  therefore, set forth some ‘General Standards and  Explanatory Notes on the Standards’.与备选的仲裁员(当事人提名之仲裁员或首席仲裁员)的单方交流,如下所述,应仅限于提供 争议的概括性描述以及获取有关潜在仲裁员是否合适的信息。
Moreover,  in order to promote greater consistency and  to avoid unnecessary challenges and arbitrator  withdrawals and removals, the Guidelines list  speciifc situations indicating whether they warrant  disclosure or disqualiifcation of an arbitrator.一方当事人之代理人不得伺机 征求备选 仲裁员对争议的实体问题发表意见。 为了判断备选 仲裁员的专长、经验、能力、时间安排、意愿及可能存在的利益冲突,在指定 仲裁员前针对以下话题的讨论的是合适的: (1) 备选仲裁员的发表物,包括书籍、文章、会议发言稿或参会情况;
Such lists, designated ‘Red’, ‘Orange’ and ‘Green’  (the ‘Application Lists’), have been updated and  appear at the end of these revised Guidelines.(2) 备选仲裁员及其所在或所拥有的律师事务所或工作组织所从事的可能让人对备 选仲裁员独立性或中立性提出合理怀疑的活动;
4.(3) 对争议的一般性质的描述;
The Guidelines relfect the understanding of  the IBA Arbitration Committee as to the best  current international practice, ifrmly rooted  in the principles expressed in the General  Standards below. The General Standards and  the Application Lists are based upon statutes  and case law in a cross-section of jurisdictions,  and upon the judgement and experience of  practitioners involved in international arbitration. In reviewing the 2004 Guidelines, the IBA  Arbitration Committee updated its analysis of the  laws and practices in a number of jurisdictions. The Guidelines seek to balance the various  interests of parties, representatives, arbitrators  and arbitration institutions, all of whom have a  responsibility for ensuring the integrity, reputation  and efifciency of international arbitration. Both the 2004 Working Group and the  Subcommittee in 2012/2014 have sought and  considered the views of leading arbitration  institutions, corporate counsel and other  persons involved in international arbitration  through public consultations at IBA annual  meetings, and at meetings with arbitrators and  practitioners.
The comments received were  reviewed in detail and many were adopted.(4) 仲裁协议的条款,尤其是对于仲裁地、语言、适用法律及仲裁规则的约定;
The IBA Arbitration Committee is grateful for the  serious consideration given to its proposals by so  many institutions and individuals.(5) 各方当事人、当事人之代理人、证人、专家及利益相关方的身份;
5.以及
The Guidelines apply to international commercial  arbitration and investment arbitration, whether  the representation of the parties is carried out by  lawyers or non-lawyers, and irrespective of whether  or not non-legal professionals serve as arbitrators. These Guidelines are not legal provisions and  do not override any applicable national law or  arbitral rules chosen by the parties. However, it is  hoped that, as was the case for the 2004 Guidelines  and other sets of rules and guidelines of the IBA  Arbitration Committee, the revised Guidelines will  ifnd broad acceptance within the international  arbitration community, and that they will assist  parties, practitioners, arbitrators, institutions and  courts in dealing with these important questions  of impartiality and independence. The IBA  Arbitration Committee trusts that the Guidelines  will be applied with robust common sense and  without unduly formalistic interpretation. The Application Lists cover many of the varied  situations that commonly arise in practice, but they  do not purport to be exhaustive, nor could they  be.
Nevertheless, the IBA Arbitration Committee  is conifdent that the Application Lists provide  concrete guidance that is useful in applying  the General Standards.(6) 仲裁程序的预计时间表及总体安排。 如若当事人事先同意或相关法律准许,在对方当事人缺席或不知情的前提下,向仲裁庭提出 的申请,尤其是临时措施申请,可能在某些情形下得到准许。
The IBA Arbitration  Committee will continue to study the actual use  of the Guidelines with a view to furthering their  improvement.最后,如若 对方当事人未能参与仲裁庭庭审或仲裁程序,且无代理人,一方当事人之代理人 可以与仲裁庭进行交流。 向仲裁庭提交书状(陈述)
8.9.
In 1987, the IBA published Rules of Ethics for International Arbitrators.一方当事人之代理人不得向仲裁庭故意提交虚假的事实陈述。 10.
Those Rules cover more  topics than these Guidelines, and they remain in  effect as to subjects that are not discussed in the  Guidelines.一方当事人一旦知晓他/她曾向仲裁庭作了虚假的事实陈述,除非基于保密及特权的反 向考量,其应 即时纠正该陈述。
The Guidelines supersede the Rules of Ethics as to the matters treated here.11.
Part I: General Standards Regarding Impartiality, Independence and Disclosure一方当事人之代理人不得提交其明知是虚假的证人或专家证据。
(1) General Principle Every arbitrator shall be impartial and independent of the parties at the time of accepting  an appointment to serve and shall remain so  until the ifnal award has been rendered or the  proceedings have otherwise ifnally terminated.如若 证人或专家提交或 企图提交一方当事人之代理人明知 或事后发现为虚假的证据,该代理人应立即建议其所 代理的当事人采取补救措施并告知不采取补救措施的后果。 一方当事人之代理人应根据 实际情况并基于保密及特权的反向 考量 ,即时采取下述一种或几种补救措施:
Explanation to General Standard 1:(1) 建议证人或专家如实作证;
A fundamental principle underlying these  Guidelines is that each arbitrator must be impartial  and independent of the parties at the time he or  she accepts an appointment to act as arbitrator,  and must remain so during the entire course of  the arbitration proceeding, including the time  period for the correction or interpretation of a  ifnal award under the relevant rules, assuming  such time period is known or readily ascertainable. The question has arisen as to whether this  obligation should extend to the period during  which the award may be challenged before the  relevant courts. The decision taken is that this  obligation should not extend in this manner,  unless the ifnal award may be referred back to  the original Arbitral Tribunal under the relevant  applicable law or relevant institutional rules. Thus,  the arbitrator’s obligation in this regard ends  when the Arbitral Tribunal has rendered the ifnal  award, and any correction or interpretation as may  be permitted under the relevant rules has been issued, or the time for seeking the same has elapsed,  the proceedings have been ifnally terminated  (for example, because of a settlement), or the  arbitrator otherwise no longer has jurisdiction. If, after setting aside or other proceedings, the  dispute is referred back to the same Arbitral  Tribunal, a fresh round of disclosure and review  of potential conlficts of interests may be necessary.
(2) Conlficts of Interest(2) 采取合理措施防止证人或专家提交虚假证据;
(a) An arbitrator shall decline to accept an  appointment or, if the arbitration has already  been commenced, refuse to continue to act as  an arbitrator, if he or she has any doubt as to his  or her ability to be impartial or independent. (b) The same principle applies if facts or  circumstances exist, or have arisen since the  appointment, which, from the point of view of  a reasonable third person having knowledge  of the relevant facts and circumstances,  would give rise to justiifable doubts as to the  arbitrator’s impartiality or independence,  unless the parties have accepted the arbitrator  in accordance with the requirements set out in  General Standard 4. (c) Doubts are justiifable if a reasonable third  person, having knowledge of the relevant  facts and circumstances, would reach the  conclusion that there is a likelihood that the  arbitrator may be inlfuenced by factors other  than the merits of the case as presented by the  parties in reaching his or her decision. (d) Justiifable doubts necessarily exist as to the  arbitrator’s impartiality or independence  in any of the situations described in the  Non-Waivable Red List. (a) If the arbitrator has doubts as to his or her  ability to be impartial and independent, the  arbitrator must decline the appointment.
This  standard should apply regardless of the stage  of the proceedings.(3) 敦促证人或专家纠正或撤回虚假证据;
This is a basic principle that is spelled out in these Guidelines in order  to avoid confusion and to foster conifdence in  the arbitral process.(4) 纠正或撤回虚假证据; (5) 如情况需要,撤回当事人之代理人的身份。 对指引第 9-11 条的评论
(b) In order for standards to be applied  as consistently as possible, the test for  disqualiifcation is an objective one.指引第 9-11 条涉及一方当事人之代理人在向仲裁庭提交书状或证据时的责任。
The wording ‘impartiality or independence’  derives from the widely adopted Article 12  of the United Nations Commission on  International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model  Law, and the use of an appearance test based  on justiifable doubts as to the impartiality  or independence of the arbitrator, as  provided in Article 12(2) of the UNCITRAL  Model Law, is to be applied objectively  (a ‘reasonable third person test’).这一原则有 时被称为代理人对仲裁庭所负有的正直 及诚实责任。 本指引指出了当事人之代理人两方面的责任:一是关于代理人所做的关于事实的陈述(第 9 与 10 条); 二是关于证人或专家所提供的证据(第 11 条)。
Again,  as described in the Explanation to General  Standard 3(e), this standard applies regardless  of the stage of the proceedings.对于向仲裁庭提交的书状,本指引 包含了两项对上述为当事人之代理人设定的原则的限制。
(c) Laws and rules that rely on the standard of  justiifable doubts often do not deifne that  standard.第一,第 9 和 10 条限定于与事实有关的虚假陈述。
This General Standard is intended  to provide some context for making this  determination.第二,根据实际情况可以推断,当事人 之代理人必须实际知晓书状的虚假性质。
(d) The Non-Waivable Red List describes  circumstances that necessarily raise justiifable  doubts as to the arbitrator’s impartiality or  independence.根据指引 第 10 条,一方当事人之代理人应当立即纠正其之前向仲裁庭提交的任何虚假陈述, 除非是基于保密及特权的反向考量而不得为之。
For example, because no one  is allowed to be his or her own judge, there  cannot be identity between an arbitrator and a  party.在更换代理人时,当 新任代理人发现其前任 代理人作了虚假陈述时,这一原则亦适用。
The parties, therefore, cannot waive the  conlfict of interest arising in such a situation.对于向仲裁庭提交的法律书状,一方当事人之代理人可以对任何法律、合同、条约或任何论 据进行他/她认为是合理的解释。
(3) Disclosure by the Arbitrator指引第 11 条涉及向仲裁庭提交一方当事人之代理人所明知的虚假证据。
(a) If facts or circumstances exist that may, in the  eyes of the parties, give rise to doubts as to  the arbitrator’s impartiality or independence,  the arbitrator shall disclose such facts or  circumstances to the parties, the arbitration  institution or other appointing authority  (if any, and if so required by the applicable  institutional rules) and the co-arbitrators, if  any, prior to accepting his or her appointment or, if thereafter, as soon as he or she learns of  them. (b) An advance declaration or waiver in relation  to possible conlficts of interest arising from  facts and circumstances that may arise in the  future does not discharge the arbitrator’s  ongoing duty of disclosure under General  Standard 3(a). (c) It follows from General Standards 1 and 2(a)  that an arbitrator who has made a disclosure  considers himself or herself to be impartial  and independent of the parties, despite the  disclosed facts, and, therefore, capable of  performing his or her duties as arbitrator. Otherwise, he or she would have declined the  nomination or appointment at the outset, or  resigned. (d) Any doubt as to whether an arbitrator should  disclose certain facts or circumstances should  be resolved in favour of disclosure.
(e) When considering whether facts or  circumstances exist that should be disclosed,  the arbitrator shall not take into account  whether the arbitration is at the beginning or  at a later stage. (a) The arbitrator’s duty to disclose under General  Standard 3(a) rests on the principle that the  parties have an interest in being fully informed  of any facts or circumstances that may be  relevant in their view. Accordingly, General  Standard 3(d) provides that any doubt as to  whether certain facts or circumstances should  be disclosed should be resolved in favour of  disclosure. However, situations that, such as  those set out in the Green List, could never  lead to disqualiifcation under the objective  test set out in General Standard 2, need not  be disclosed. As relfected in General Standard  3(c), a disclosure does not imply that the  disclosed facts are such as to disqualify the  arbitrator under General Standard 2.
The duty of disclosure under General  Standard 3(a) is ongoing in nature.一方当事人之代理 人不得故意提供虚假证据或证词。
(b) The IBA Arbitration Committee has  considered the increasing use by prospective  arbitrators of declarations in respect of facts  or circumstances that may arise in the future,  and the possible conlficts of interest that may  result, sometimes referred to as ‘advance  waivers’. Such declarations do not discharge  the arbitrator’s ongoing duty of disclosure  under General Standard 3(a). The Guidelines,  however, do not otherwise take a position as to  the validity and effect of advance declarations  or waivers, because the validity and effect of  any advance declaration or waiver must be  assessed in view of the speciifc text of the  advance declaration or waiver, the particular  circumstances at hand and the applicable law. (c) A disclosure does not imply the existence of a  conlfict of interest. An arbitrator who has made  a disclosure to the parties considers himself or  herself to be impartial and independent of the  parties, despite the disclosed facts, or else he  or she would have declined the nomination,  or resigned.
An arbitrator making a disclosure  thus feels capable of performing his or her  duties.一方当事人之代理人因此不得协助证人或专家或试图影响 证人或专家而使其在口头证词或书面证人证言或专家报告中向仲裁庭提供虚假证据。
It is the purpose of disclosure to allow  the parties to judge whether they agree with  the evaluation of the arbitrator and, if they  so wish, to explore the situation further.本指引第 9 条和第 10 条所列出的考虑也同样适用于第 11 条。
It is  hoped that the promulgation of this General  Standard will eliminate the misconception  that disclosure itself implies doubts sufifcient  to disqualify the arbitrator, or even creates a  presumption in favour of disqualiifcation.规则第 11 条对于 当事人之代 理人在证人或专家提交或企图提交一方当事人之代理人明知或事后发现为虚假的证据时可 以采取补救措施上更加具体。 第 11 条所列举的补偿措施并非是穷尽的。
Instead, any challenge should only be  successful if an objective test, as set forth in  General Standard 2 above, is met.如若情况允许,这 些补救措施也可以扩展到于当事人之代理人撤回当事人之代理人的身份。
Under  Comment 5 of the Practical Application of the  General Standards, a failure to disclose certain  facts and circumstances that may, in the eyes  of the parties, give rise to doubts as to the  arbitrator’s impartiality or independence, does not necessarily mean that a conlfict of interest  exists, or that a disqualiifcation should ensue. (d) In determining which facts should be disclosed,  an arbitrator should take into account all  circumstances known to him or her. If the  arbitrator ifnds that he or she should make a  disclosure, but that professional secrecy rules or  other rules of practice or professional conduct  prevent such disclosure, he or she should not  accept the appointment, or should resign. (e) Disclosure or disqualiifcation (as set out  in General Standards 2 and 3) should  not depend on the particular stage of the  arbitration. In order to determine whether  the arbitrator should disclose, decline the  appointment or refuse to continue to act, the  facts and circumstances alone are relevant, not  the current stage of the proceedings, or the  consequences of the withdrawal.
As a practical  matter, arbitration institutions may make a  distinction depending on the stage of the  arbitration.第 11 条使用了‘可 以’一词,即承认了某些补救措施,例如纠正或撤回虚假的证人或专家证据,可能与某些法 律体系的律师执业道德规则不相符合。
Courts may likewise apply different  standards.12.
Nevertheless, no distinction is  made by these Guidelines depending on  the stage of the arbitral proceedings. While  there are practical concerns, if an arbitrator  must withdraw after the arbitration has  commenced, a distinction based on the stage  of the arbitration would be inconsistent with  the General Standards.当仲裁程序涉及到或可能涉及到文件材料出示,一方当事人之代理人应当向客户告知尽 力最大合理程度保留文件材料的必要性,包括那些可能与仲裁有关的,依照文件材料 保 留政策或在正常商业往来中可能被删除的电子文件材料。 13. 一方当事人之代理人不得以不正当目的,如干扰或延迟仲裁程序,提出或拒绝出示文件 材料的请求。
(4) Waiver by the Parties14.
(a) If, within 30 days after the receipt of any  disclosure by the arbitrator, or after a party  otherwise learns of facts or circumstances  that could constitute a potential conlfict of  interest for an arbitrator, a party does not  raise an express objection with regard to that  arbitrator, subject to paragraphs (b) and (c) of  this General Standard, the party is deemed to  have waived any potential conlfict of interest  in respect of the arbitrator based on such  facts or circumstances and may not raise any 10 objection based on such facts or circumstances  at a later stage. (b) However, if facts or circumstances exist as  described in the Non-Waivable Red List, any  waiver by a party (including any declaration  or advance waiver, such as that contemplated  in General Standard 3(b)), or any agreement  by the parties to have such a person serve as  arbitrator, shall be regarded as invalid. (c) A person should not serve as an arbitrator  when a conlfict of interest, such as those  exempliifed in the Waivable Red List, exists.
Nevertheless, such a person may accept  appointment as arbitrator, or continue to act  as an arbitrator, if the following conditions are  met:一方当事人之代理人应当向其代理的当事人解释出示其同意或被命令出示文件材料的 必要性及未能出示 文件 材料 的潜在后果。 15.
(i) all parties, all arbitrators and the  arbitration institution, or other appointing  authority (if any), have full knowledge of  the conlfict of interest;一方当事人之代理人应当建议且协助其代理的当事人采取合理的措施来确保:(一)对 当事人同意或被命令出示的证据已进行了合理的搜索,以及(二)应予回应的非特权文 件材料都已出示。
and16.
(ii) all parties expressly agree that such a  person may serve as arbitrator, despite the  conlfict of interest.一方当事人之代理人不得压制或隐瞒,或建议其当事人压制或隐瞒另一方当事人要求出 示或其掌握或被命令出示的文件材料。
(d) An arbitrator may assist the parties in  reaching a settlement of the dispute, through  conciliation, mediation or otherwise, at any  stage of the proceedings. However, before  doing so, the arbitrator should receive  an express agreement by the parties that  acting in such a manner shall not disqualify  the arbitrator from continuing to serve as  arbitrator. Such express agreement shall  be considered to be an effective waiver of  any potential conlfict of interest that may  arise from the arbitrator’s participation in  such a process, or from information that the  arbitrator may learn in the process. If the  assistance by the arbitrator does not lead to the  ifnal settlement of the case, the parties remain  bound by their waiver. However, consistent with  General Standard 2(a) and notwithstanding  such agreement, the arbitrator shall resign if,
11as a consequence of his or her involvement in  the settlement process, the arbitrator develops  doubts as to his or her ability to remain  impartial or independent in the future course  of the arbitration. (a) Under General Standard 4(a), a party is deemed  to have waived any potential conlfict of interest, if  such party has not raised an objection in respect  of such conlfict of interest within 30 days. This  time limit should run from the date on which the  party learns of the relevant facts or circumstances,  including through the disclosure process. (b) General Standard 4(b) serves to exclude from  the scope of General Standard 4(a) the facts and  circumstances described in the Non-Waivable  Red List. Some arbitrators make declarations that  seek waivers from the parties with respect to facts  or circumstances that may arise in the future.
Irrespective of any such waiver sought by the  arbitrator, as provided in General Standard 3(b),  facts and circumstances arising in the course of  the arbitration should be disclosed to the parties  by virtue of the arbitrator’s ongoing duty of  disclosure. (c) Notwithstanding a serious conlfict of interest, such  as those that are described by way of example in  the Waivable Red List, the parties may wish to  engage such a person as an arbitrator. Here, party  autonomy and the desire to have only impartial  and independent arbitrators must be balanced. Persons with a serious conlfict of interest, such as  those that are described by way of example in the  Waivable Red List, may serve as arbitrators only if  the parties make fully informed, explicit waivers. (d) The concept of the Arbitral Tribunal assisting the  parties in reaching a settlement of their dispute  in the course of the arbitration proceedings is  well-established in some jurisdictions, but not in  others.
Informed consent by the parties to such a  process prior to its beginning should be regarded  as an effective waiver of a potential conlfict of  interest. Certain jurisdictions may require such consent to be in writing and signed by the parties. Subject to any requirements of applicable law,  express consent may be sufifcient and may be  given at a hearing and relfected in the minutes or  transcript of the proceeding. In addition, in order  to avoid parties using an arbitrator as mediator as a  means of disqualifying the arbitrator, the General  Standard makes clear that the waiver should  remain effective, if the mediation is unsuccessful. In giving their express consent, the parties should  realise the consequences of the arbitrator assisting  them in a settlement process, including the risk of  the resignation of the arbitrator.
(5) Scope (a) These Guidelines apply equally to tribunal  chairs, sole arbitrators and co-arbitrators,  howsoever appointed.17. 如在仲裁过程中,一方当事人之代理人发现应该出示 但未出示的文件材料 ,应向其当事 人告知出示该文件材料 的必要性及未能出示 的后果。
(b) Arbitral or administrative secretaries and  assistants, to an individual arbitrator or the  Arbitral Tribunal, are bound by the same  duty of independence and impartiality as  arbitrators, and it is the responsibility of the  Arbitral Tribunal to ensure that such duty is  respected at all stages of the arbitration. (a) Because each member of an Arbitral  Tribunal has an obligation to be impartial  and independent, the General Standards  do not distinguish between sole arbitrators,  tribunal chairs, party-appointed arbitrators or  arbitrators appointed by an institution. (b) Some arbitration institutions require arbitral  or administrative secretaries and assistants  to sign a declaration of independence  and impartiality. Whether or not such a  requirement exists, arbitral or administrative  secretaries and assistants to the Arbitral  Tribunal are bound by the same duty of  independence and impartiality (including  the duty of disclosure) as arbitrators, and it is  the responsibility of the Arbitral Tribunal to ensure that such duty is respected at all stages  of the arbitration. Furthermore, this duty  applies to arbitral or administrative secretaries  and assistants to either the Arbitral Tribunal or  individual members of the Arbitral Tribunal.
(6) Relationships对指引第 12-17 条的评论
(a) The arbitrator is in principle considered to  bear the identity of his or her law ifrm, but  when considering the relevance of facts  or circumstances to determine whether a  potential conlfict of interest exists, or whether  disclosure should be made, the activities  of an arbitrator’s law ifrm, if any, and the  relationship of the arbitrator with the law ifrm,  should be considered in each individual case. The fact that the activities of the arbitrator’s  ifrm involve one of the parties shall not  necessarily constitute a source of such conlfict,  or a reason for disclosure. Similarly, if one of  the parties is a member of a group with which  the arbitrator’s ifrm has a relationship, such  fact should be considered in each individual  case, but shall not necessarily constitute by  itself a source of a conlfict of interest, or a  reason for disclosure. (b) If one of the parties is a legal entity, any legal or  physical person having a controlling inlfuence  on the legal entity, or a direct economic  interest in, or a duty to indemnify a party for,  the award to be rendered in the arbitration,  may be considered to bear the identity of  such party. (a) The growing size of law ifrms should be  taken into account as part of today’s reality in  international arbitration.
There is a need to  balance the interests of a party to appoint the  arbitrator of its choice, who may be a partner  at a large law ifrm, and the importance of  maintaining conifdence in the impartiality  and independence of international  arbitrators.国际律师协会在《国际律师协会国际仲裁取证规则》中规定了文件材料出示的范围(参见第
The arbitrator must, in principle,3 条与第 9 条)。
14be considered to bear the identity of his or her  law ifrm, but the activities of the arbitrator’s  ifrm should not automatically create a conlfict  of interest. The relevance of the activities  of the arbitrator’s ifrm, such as the nature,  timing and scope of the work by the law ifrm,  and the relationship of the arbitrator with the  law ifrm, should be considered in each case. General Standard 6(a) uses the term ‘involve’  rather than ‘acting for’ because the relevant  connections with a party may include activities  other than representation on a legal matter. Although barristers’ chambers should not be  equated with law ifrms for the purposes of  conlficts, and no general standard is proffered  for barristers’ chambers, disclosure may be  warranted in view of the relationships among  barristers, parties or counsel. When a party  to an arbitration is a member of a group  of companies, special questions regarding  conlficts of interest arise.
Because individual  corporate structure arrangements vary widely,  a catch-all rule is not appropriate.本指引 第 12-17 条涉及文件材料出示相关的当事人之代理人行为。
Instead,  the particular circumstances of an afifliation  with another entity within the same group  of companies, and the relationship of that  entity with the arbitrator’s law ifrm, should be  considered in each individual case. (b) When a party in international arbitration is a  legal entity, other legal and physical persons  may have a controlling inlfuence on this  legal entity, or a direct economic interest in,  or a duty to indemnify a party for, the award  to be rendered in the arbitration. Each  situation should be assessed individually, and  General Standard 6(b) clariifes that such  legal persons and individuals may be  considered effectively to be that party. Third-party funders and insurers in relation to  the dispute may have a direct economic interest  in the award, and as such may be considered  to be the equivalent of the party. For these  purposes, the terms ‘third-party funder’ and  ‘insurer’ refer to any person or entity that is  contributing funds, or other material support,
15to the prosecution or defence of the case and  that has a direct economic interest in, or a  duty to indemnify a party for, the award to be  rendered in the arbitration. (7) Duty of the Parties and the Arbitrator当事人之代理人通常不确定各自国家的职业行为标准是否适用于或在多大程度上适用于国 际仲裁中的文件材料保存、收集及出示 过程。
(a) A party shall inform an arbitrator, the  Arbitral Tribunal, the other parties and the  arbitration institution or other appointing  authority (if any) of any relationship, direct  or indirect, between the arbitrator and the  party (or another company of the same  group of companies, or an individual having  a controlling inlfuence on the party in the  arbitration), or between the arbitrator and  any person or entity with a direct economic  interest in, or a duty to indemnify a party for,  the award to be rendered in the arbitration. The party shall do so on its own initiative at  the earliest opportunity. (b) A party shall inform an arbitrator, the Arbitral  Tribunal, the other parties and the arbitration  institution or other appointing authority  (if any) of the identity of its counsel appearing  in the arbitration, as well as of any relationship,  including membership of the same barristers’  chambers, between its counsel and the  arbitrator. The party shall do so on its own  initiative at the earliest opportunity, and upon  any change in its counsel team. (c) In order to comply with General Standard 7(a),  a party shall perform reasonable enquiries  and provide any relevant information available  to it.
(d) An arbitrator is under a duty to make  reasonable enquiries to identify any conlfict of  interest, as well as any facts or circumstances  that may reasonably give rise to doubts as  to his or her impartiality or independence. Failure to disclose a conlfict is not excused by  lack of knowledge, if the arbitrator does not  perform such reasonable enquiries. (a) The parties are required to disclose any  relationship with the arbitrator. Disclosure  of such relationships should reduce the  risk of an unmeritorious challenge of an  arbitrator’s impartiality or independence  based on information learned after the  appointment. The parties’ duty of disclosure  of any relationship, direct or indirect, between  the arbitrator and the party (or another  company of the same group of companies, or  an individual having a controlling inlfuence  on the party in the arbitration) has been  extended to relationships with persons or  entities having a direct economic interest in  the award to be rendered in the arbitration,  such as an entity providing funding for the  arbitration, or having a duty to indemnify a  party for the award.
(b) Counsel appearing in the arbitration, namely  the persons involved in the representation of  the parties in the arbitration, must be identiifed  by the parties at the earliest opportunity. A party’s duty to disclose the identity of  counsel appearing in the arbitration extends  to all members of that party’s counsel team  and arises from the outset of the proceedings. (c) In order to satisfy their duty of disclosure, the  parties are required to investigate any relevant  information that is reasonably available to  them. In addition, any party to an arbitration  is required, at the outset and on an ongoing  basis during the entirety of the proceedings,  to make a reasonable effort to ascertain  and to disclose available information that,  applying the general standard, might affect  the arbitrator’s impartiality or independence. (d) In order to satisfy their duty of disclosure  under the Guidelines, arbitrators are required  to investigate any relevant information that is  reasonably available to them.
Part II: Practical Application of the General Standards 1.在同一个仲裁程序中不同当事人之代理人适用 不同的行为标准是很普遍的。
If the Guidelines are to have an important  practical inlfuence, they should address situations  that are likely to occur in today’s arbitration  practice and should provide speciifc guidance to  arbitrators, parties, institutions and courts as to  which situations do or do not constitute conlficts  of interest, or should or should not be disclosed.例如,一方当事人之代理人会认为他/她有义务确保自己代理 的当事人采取合理的努力寻找并出示所有应予回应且不受特权保护的文件材料 ,但另一方当 事人之代理人可能会认为出示文件 材料 完全是其当事人的责任。
For this purpose, the Guidelines categorise  situations that may occur in the following  Application Lists.在这些情形下,获取信息或 证据途径上的差异可能会损坏仲裁程序的公正和公平 。
These lists cannot cover every  situation.本指引旨在通过建议设立国际仲裁中的行为标准来解决这些难题。
In all cases, the General Standards  should control the outcome. 2. The Red List consists of two parts: ‘a Non-Waivable  Red List’ (see General Standards 2(d) and 4(b));在某些案件中,如若各方 当事人之代理人对其在文件材料出示中的角色有类似期待或仲裁中没有文件材料出示或文 件材料出示很少,这些指引 的规定可能就不需要了。
and ‘a Waivable Red List’ (see General Standard  4(c)).本指引旨在促进采用客观合理的措施来保存、寻找及出示一方当事人有义务披露的信息。
These lists are non-exhaustive and detail  speciifc situations that, depending on the facts  of a given case, give rise to justiifable doubts as to  the arbitrator’s impartiality and independence.根据本指引第 12-17 条,一方当事人之代理人在特定情形下应当向其代理的当事人建议:(一) 指认己方控制下的占有可能与仲裁相关文件材料 (包括电子文件材料)的个人;
That is, in these circumstances, an objective  conlfict of interest exists from the point of view  of a reasonable third person having knowledge  of the relevant facts and circumstances  (see General Standard 2(b)).(二)告知 这些人需要保存而不得损毁任何这些文件材料; (三)中止或摈弃任何文件材料 保留或其他 的政策或实践,以防可能的相关文件材料在正常的营业过程中被损坏。
The Non-Waivable  Red List includes situations deriving from the  overriding principle that no person can be his or  her own judge. Therefore, acceptance of such a  situation cannot cure the conlfict. The Waivable  Red List covers situations that are serious but not  as severe.根据指引 第 12-17 条,一方当事人之代理人在特定情形下应当建议并帮助其代理的当事人: (一)设立一套合理且有效的系统收集和审阅由其控制下的个人所掌握的文件材料,以鉴别 与仲裁有关或被另一方要求的文件材料;
Because of their seriousness, unlike  circumstances described in the Orange List, these  situations should be considered waivable, but  only if and when the parties, being aware of the  conlfict of interest situation, expressly state their  willingness to have such a person act as arbitrator,  as set forth in General Standard 4(c). 3. The Orange List is a non-exhaustive list of speciifc  situations that, depending on the facts of a given  case, may, in the eyes of the parties, give rise to doubts  as to the arbitrator’s impartiality or independence. The Orange List thus relfects situations that  would fall under General Standard 3(a), with the  consequence that the arbitrator has a duty to  disclose such situations. In all these situations, the  parties are deemed to have accepted the arbitrator  if, after disclosure, no timely objection is made, as  established in General Standard 4(a).
4. Disclosure does not imply the existence of a  conlfict of interest; nor should it by itself result  either in a disqualiifcation of the arbitrator, or  in a presumption regarding disqualiifcation.(二)确保当事人之代理人可以接触所有文件材料, 且拥有副本。
The purpose of the disclosure is to inform the  parties of a situation that they may wish to explore  further in order to determine whether objectively –  that is, from the point of view of a reasonable third  person having knowledge of the relevant facts and  circumstances – there are justiifable doubts as  to the arbitrator’s impartiality or independence. If the conclusion is that there are no justiifable  doubts, the arbitrator can act. Apart from the  situations covered by the Non-Waivable Red  List, he or she can also act if there is no timely  objection by the parties or, in situations covered  by the Waivable Red List, if there is a speciifc  acceptance by the parties in accordance with  General Standard 4(c). If a party challenges the  arbitrator, he or she can nevertheless act, if the  authority that rules on the challenge decides that  the challenge does not meet the objective test for  disqualiifcation. A later challenge based on the fact that an arbitrator  did not disclose such facts or circumstances should  not result automatically in non-appointment, later  disqualiifcation or a successful challenge to any  award.
Nondisclosure cannot by itself make an  arbitrator partial or lacking independence: only  the facts or circumstances that he or she failed to  disclose can do so. Situations not listed in the Orange List or falling  outside the time limits used in some of the Orange List situations are generally not subject  to disclosure.《国际律师协会国际仲裁取证规则》第 3 条规定要求出示与案件相关的并对案件结果起重要 作用的文件材料,本指引第 12 条则仅涉及可能与案件相关的文件材料 ,其原因有所不同: 当一方当事人之代理人向其当事人建议保存证据,该代理人通常在此时未能评估 证据的重要 性,因此对文件材料保留及收集的判断只能是与案件潜在的相关性。
However, an arbitrator needs to  assess on a case-by-case basis whether a given  situation, even though not mentioned in the  Orange List, is nevertheless such as to give rise  to justiifable doubts as to his or her impartiality  or independence. Because the Orange List is a  non-exhaustive list of examples, there may be  situations not mentioned, which, depending on  the circumstances, may need to be disclosed by  an arbitrator. Such may be the case, for example,  in the event of repeat past appointments by  the same party or the same counsel beyond the  three-year period provided for in the Orange List,  or when an arbitrator concurrently acts as counsel  in an unrelated case in which similar issues of  law are raised. Likewise, an appointment made  by the same party or the same counsel appearing  before an arbitrator, while the case is ongoing,  may also have to be disclosed, depending on  the circumstances. While the Guidelines do not  require disclosure of the fact that an arbitrator  concurrently serves, or has in the past served, on  the same Arbitral Tribunal with another member  of the tribunal, or with one of the counsel in  the current proceedings, an arbitrator should  assess on a case-by-case basis whether the fact of  having frequently served as counsel with, or as  an arbitrator on, Arbitral Tribunals with another  member of the tribunal may create a perceived  imbalance within the tribunal.
If the conclusion is  ‘yes’, the arbitrator should consider a disclosure. The Green List is a non-exhaustive list of speciifc  situations where no appearance and no actual  conlfict of interest exists from an objective point  of view.最后,当事人之申请人不应仅出干扰仲裁、获取与仲裁无关的文件材料或造成仲裁延误的目 的申请出示或拒绝申请出示。
Thus, the arbitrator has no duty to disclose  situations falling within the Green List. As stated  in the Explanation to General Standard 3(a),  there should be a limit to disclosure, based on  reasonableness;18. 在向潜在的证人或专家获取任何信息之前,一方当事人之代理人应当向对方表明其身份、 所代理的当事人的身份以及获取信息的原因。 19.
in some situations, an objective  test should prevail over the purely subjective test  of ‘the eyes’ of the parties.一方当事人之代理人应向任何潜在的证人告知其有权就所联系事宜告知或聘用自己的 律师并中断与当事人之代理人交流。
8.20.
The borderline between the categories that  comprise the Lists can be thin.一方当事人之代理人可以协助证人及专家准备证人证言与专家报告。
It can be debated whether a certain situation should be on one  List instead of another.21.
Also, the Lists contain,  for various situations, general terms such as  ‘signiifcant’ and ‘relevant’.一方当事人之代理人应尽可能确保证人证言反映的是证人自己相关事实、事件及情况的 描述。
The Lists relfect  international principles and best practices to the  extent possible.22.
Further deifnition of the norms,  which are to be interpreted reasonably in light of  the facts and circumstances in each case, would be  counterproductive.一方当事人之代理人应尽可能确保专家报告反映的是专家自己的分析和意见。
1.23.
Non-Waivable Red List一方当事人之代理人不得引诱或鼓励证人作伪证。
1.1 There is an identity between a party and  the arbitrator, or the arbitrator is a legal  representative or employee of an entity that is a  party in the arbitration. 1.2 The arbitrator is a manager, director or member  of the supervisory board, or has a controlling  inlfuence on one of the parties or an entity that  has a direct economic interest in the award to be  rendered in the arbitration. 1.3 The arbitrator has a signiifcant ifnancial or  personal interest in one of the parties, or the  outcome of the case. 1.4 The arbitrator or his or her ifrm regularly advises  the party, or an afifliate of the party, and the  arbitrator or his or her ifrm derives signiifcant  ifnancial income therefrom. 2.
Waivable Red List24.
2.1 Relationship of the arbitrator to the dispute 2.1.1 The arbitrator has given legal advice,  or provided an expert opinion, on the  dispute to a party or an afifliate of one of  the parties.为了讨论或准备可能的证言,一方当事人之代理人可以在与证人或专家见面或互动,只 要符合以下原则:所提供的 证据应反映证人自己对相关事实、事件的描述或情况或专家 自己的分析或意见。 25.
2.1.2 The arbitrator had a prior involvement in  the dispute.一方当事人之代理人可以支付、提议支付或同意支付:
2.2 Arbitrator’s direct or indirect interest in the  dispute(1) 证人或专家为准备出庭作证及出庭作证的合理支出;
2.2.1 The arbitrator holds shares, either directly  or indirectly, in one of the parties, or an  afifliate of one of the parties, this party or(2) 对证人出庭作证及准备出庭作证所花费时间的合理补偿;
20an afifliate being privately held.以及
2.2.2 A close family member 3 of the arbitrator has a signiifcant ifnancial interest in the  outcome of the dispute.(3) 当事人指定专家提供专业服务的合理费用。
2.2.3 The arbitrator, or a close family member  of the arbitrator, has a close relationship  with a non-party who may be liable to  recourse on the part of the unsuccessful  party in the dispute.本指引第 18-25 条涉及当事人之代理人与证人及专家之间的交流互动。
2.3 Arbitrator’s relationship with the parties or  counsel当事人之代理人与证 人之间的互动同样也在本指引第 9-11 条关于向仲裁庭提交书状的内容里有所阐述。
2.3.1 The arbitrator currently represents or  advises one of the parties, or an afifliate of  one of the parties.为了促进当事人之间的平等待遇原则,许多国际仲裁的执业人员皆渴望在与证人及专家关系 上有更透明、更 可预见的行为标准。
2.3.2 The arbitrator currently represents or  advises the lawyer or law ifrm acting as  counsel for one of the parties.不同法律体系的不同的做法可能会造成不平等并威胁仲 裁程序的公正 。
2.3.3 The arbitrator is a lawyer in the same law  ifrm as the counsel to one of the parties.本指引旨在反映在准备证人及专家证词方面的最佳国际仲裁实践。
2.3.4 The arbitrator is a manager, director or  member of the supervisory board, or has  a controlling inlfuence in an afifliate当一方当事人之代理人联系一位潜在证人,他/她应当披露自己的身份并在获取任何信息前 说明其联系证人的原因(本指引第 18 条)。
4 of one of the parties, if the afifliate is directly  involved in the matters in dispute in the  arbitration.一方当事人之代理人也应 使潜在的证人了解其有 权就所联系事宜告知或聘用自己的律师并让其律师参与以后的任何交流(本指引第 19 条)。
2.3.5 The arbitrator’s law ifrm had a previous  but terminated involvement in the case  without the arbitrator being involved  himself or herself.在一些法律体系下,在同有代理律师的潜在证人联系方面,国内的执业行为规范会有更高的 标准。
2.3.6 The arbitrator’s law ifrm currently has a  signiifcant commercial relationship with one  of the parties, or an afifliate of one of the  parties.例如,在普通法体系下,仍然禁止律师联系任何将由律师代理参与仲裁的潜在证人。
2.3.7 The arbitrator regularly advises one of 3 Throughout the Application Lists, the term ‘close family  member’ refers to a: spouse, sibling, child, parent or life  partner, in addition to any other family member with whom a  close relationship exists. 4 Throughout the Application Lists, the term ‘afifliate’  encompasses all companies in a group of companies,  including the parent company. the parties, or an afifliate of one of the  parties, but neither the arbitrator nor his  or her ifrm derives a signiifcant ifnancial  income therefrom. 2.3.8 The arbitrator has a close family  relationship with one of the parties, or  with a manager, director or member of  the supervisory board, or any person  having a controlling inlfuence in one of  the parties, or an afifliate of one of the  parties, or with a counsel representing a  party. 2.3.9 A close family member of the arbitrator  has a signiifcant ifnancial or personal  interest in one of the parties, or an afifliate  of one of the parties.
3. Orange List 3.1 Previous services for one of the parties or other  involvement in the case如若一方当事人之代理人认为他/她受制于比本指引更严格的行为标准,他或她可以与另一 方当事人和/或仲裁庭一起处理这一情况。
3.1.1 The arbitrator has, within the past three  years, served as counsel for one of the  parties, or an afifliate of one of the  parties, or has previously advised or been  consulted by the party, or an afifliate of  the party, making the appointment in an  unrelated matter, but the arbitrator and  the party, or the afifliate of the party, have  no ongoing relationship. 3.1.2 The arbitrator has, within the past three  years, served as counsel against one of  the parties, or an afifliate of one of the  parties, in an unrelated matter. 3.1.3 The arbitrator has, within the past three  years, been appointed as arbitrator on two  or more occasions by one of the parties, or  an afifliate of one of the parties. 5 It may be the practice in certain types of arbitration, such  as maritime, sports or commodities arbitration, to draw  arbitrators from a smaller or specialised pool of individuals. If in such ifelds it is the custom and practice for parties to  frequently appoint the same arbitrator in different cases,
3.1.4 The arbitrator’s law ifrm has, within the  past three years, acted for or against one  of the parties, or an afifliate of one of the  parties, in an unrelated matter without  the involvement of the arbitrator. 3.1.5 The arbitrator currently serves, or has  served within the past three years, as  arbitrator in another arbitration on a  related issue involving one of the parties,  or an afifliate of one of the parties. 3.2 Current services for one of the parties 3.2.1 The arbitrator’s law ifrm is currently  rendering services to one of the parties,  or to an afifliate of one of the parties,  without creating a signiifcant commercial  relationship for the law ifrm and without  the involvement of the arbitrator. 3.2.2 A law ifrm or other legal organisation that  shares signiifcant fees or other revenues  with the arbitrator’s law ifrm renders  services to one of the parties, or an  afifliate of one of the parties, before the  Arbitral Tribunal.
3.2.3 The arbitrator or his or her ifrm represents  a party, or an afifliate of one of the parties  to the arbitration, on a regular basis, but  such representation does not concern the  current dispute. 3.3 Relationship between an arbitrator and another  arbitrator or counsel如本指引 第 20 条所述,一方当事人之代理人可以协助准备证人证言及专家报告,但应当尽 力确保证人证言反映证人自己对事实、事件或情况的描述(本 指引 第 21 条),专家报告反映 专家自己的观点、分析与结论(本指引 第 22 条)。
3.3.1 The arbitrator and another arbitrator are  lawyers in the same law ifrm.一方当事人之代理人不得引诱或鼓励证人作伪证(指引第 23 条)。
3.3.2 The arbitrator and another arbitrator,  or the counsel for one of the parties,  are members of the same barristers’  chambers.作为准备仲裁证词的一部分,一方当事人之代理人可以 会见证人或专家(或潜在证人与专家) 并讨论他们备选的证词。
no disclosure of this fact is required, where all parties in the  arbitration should be familiar with such custom and practice.一方当事人之代理人也可以帮助证人准备他/她的证人证言或专家 报告。
3.3.3 The arbitrator was, within the past three  years, a partner of, or otherwise afifliated  with, another arbitrator or any of the  counsel in the arbitration.此外,一方当事人之代理人可以协助证人,包括练习提问和回答的方式,来准备他们 在直接询问和交叉询问中的证词(指引第 24 条)。
3.3.4 A lawyer in the arbitrator’s law ifrm is an  arbitrator in another dispute involving the  same party or parties, or an afifliate of one  of the parties.准备可以包括了解证人质证阶段的程序以 及准备直接证词和交叉询问。
3.3.5 A close family member of the arbitrator  is a partner or employee of the law ifrm  representing one of the parties, but is not  assisting with the dispute.但是此类练习 不得改变证人或专家证据的真实性,证人或专家 证据应当始终反映证人自己对相关事实、事件或情况的描述 或专家自己的分析或意见。
3.3.6 A close personal friendship exists between  an arbitrator and a counsel of a party. 3.3.7 Enmity exists between an arbitrator and  counsel appearing in the arbitration. 3.3.8 The arbitrator has, within the past three  years, been appointed on more than three  occasions by the same counsel, or the  same law ifrm.最后,当事人之代理人可以 为证人所付出的时间支付、提议支付或默许支付合理的补偿,对 专家提供的专业服务支付、提议支付或默许 支付 合理的费用 (指引第 25 条)。 对不当行为的救济 26.
3.3.9 The arbitrator and another arbitrator,  or counsel for one of the parties in the  arbitration, currently act or have acted  together within the past three years as cocounsel.如若仲裁庭在告知当事人及给予其合理抗辩的机会后,发现一方当事人之代理人有如下 不当行为时,可以适当进行:
3.4 Relationship between arbitrator and party and  others involved in the arbitration(1) 警告该当事人之代理人
3.4.1 The arbitrator’s law ifrm is currently  acting adversely to one of the parties, or  an afifliate of one of the parties.(2) 在评估当事人之代理人依赖的证据、提出的法律论证上进行合适的推断;
3.4.2 The arbitrator has been associated with a  party, or an afifliate of one of the parties,  in a professional capacity, such as a former  employee or partner.(3) 在分配仲裁费用时,体现当事人之代理人的不当行为如何和多大程度上影响仲裁庭 对仲裁费用的分配。
3.4.3 A close personal friendship exists between  an arbitrator and a manager or director  or a member of the supervisory board  of: a party;(4) 采取任何其他合适的措施以维护仲裁程序的公平与公正。
an entity that has a direct  economic interest in the award to be  rendered in the arbitration;27.
or any person having a controlling inlfuence, such as a  controlling shareholder interest, on one  of the parties or an afifliate of one of the  parties or a witness or expert.在处理不当行为时,仲裁庭应当考虑:
3.4.4 Enmity exists between an arbitrator and a  manager or director or a member of the  supervisory board of: a party;(1) 维护仲裁程序公正与公平以及仲裁裁决可执行性的需要;
an entity  that has a direct economic interest in the  award;(2) 不当行为的裁定对各方 当事人权利的潜在影响;
or any person having a controlling  inlfuence in one of the parties or an  afifliate of one of the parties or a witness  or expert.(3) 不当行为的性质与严重程度,包括不当行为对仲裁程序进展的影响程度;
3.4.5 If the arbitrator is a former judge, he or  she has, within the past three years, heard  a signiifcant case involving one of the  parties, or an afifliate of one of the parties.(4) 当事人之代理人是否善意; (5) 相关特权与保密的考虑;
3.5 Other circumstances以及
3.5.1 The arbitrator holds shares, either directly  or indirectly, that by reason of number  or denomination constitute a material  holding in one of the parties, or an  afifliate of one of the parties, this party or  afifliate being publicly listed.(6) 当事人明知、宽恕、指示或参与其代理人的不当行为的程度。
3.5.2 The arbitrator has publicly advocated  a position on the case, whether in a  published paper, or speech, or otherwise.指引第 26-27 条明晰了对当事人之代理人不当行为的潜在补救措施。
3.5.3 The arbitrator holds a position with the  appointing authority with respect to the  dispute.上述两条指引 的目的在于保留或恢复仲裁的公平与公正。
3.5.4 The arbitrator is a manager, director or  member of the supervisory board, or has  a controlling inlfuence on an afifliate  of one of the parties, where the afifliate  is not directly involved in the matters in  dispute in the arbitration. 4. Green List仲裁庭应当考虑不当行为的性质及严重性、当事人及其代理人的善意、补救措施对当事人权 利的影响以及维护仲裁公正 、有效和公平以及裁决可执行性的需要,适用最恰当的一种或几 种补救措施。
4.1 Previously expressed legal opinions指引第 27 条列出了一系列因素。
4.1.1 The arbitrator has previously expressed  a legal opinion (such as in a law review  article or public lecture) concerning an issue that also arises in the arbitration (but  this opinion is not focused on the case).这些因素并非是穷尽也不具约束力,而恰好反映了处理代 理人不当行为时采取的综合平衡做法,以确保仲裁程序能以公平恰当的方式进行。
4.2.1 A ifrm, in association or in alliance  with the arbitrator’s law ifrm, but that  does not share signiifcant fees or other  revenues with the arbitrator’s law ifrm,  renders services to one of the parties, or  an afifliate of one of the parties, in an  unrelated matter. 4.3 Contacts with another arbitrator, or with counsel  for one of the parties 4.3.1 The arbitrator has a relationship with  another arbitrator, or with the counsel for  one of the parties, through membership  in the same professional association,  or social or charitable organisation, or  through a social media network. 4.3.2 The arbitrator and counsel for one of the  parties have previously served together as  arbitrators. 4.3.3 The arbitrator teaches in the same  faculty or school as another arbitrator or  counsel to one of the parties, or serves  as an ofifcer of a professional association  or social or charitable organisation with  another arbitrator or counsel for one of  the parties.
4.3.4 The arbitrator was a speaker, moderator  or organiser in one or more conferences,  or participated in seminars or working  parties of a professional, social or  charitable organisation, with another  arbitrator or counsel to the parties. 4.4 Contacts between the arbitrator and one of the  parties在对指称 的不当行为采取任何补救措施之前,仲裁庭最好给予各方当事人及受责备的代理人 对指称表达意见的权利。
4.4.1 The arbitrator has had an initial contact  with a party, or an afifliate of a party (or  their counsel) prior to appointment, if  this contact is limited to the arbitrator’s  availability and qualiifcations to serve, 26or to the names of possible candidates  for a chairperson, and did not address  the merits or procedural aspects of  the dispute, other than to provide the  arbitrator with a basic understanding of  the case. 4.4.2 The arbitrator holds an insigniifcant  amount of shares in one of the parties, or  an afifliate of one of the parties, which is  publicly listed. 4.4.3 The arbitrator and a manager, director or  member of the supervisory board, or any  person having a controlling inlfuence on  one of the parties, or an afifliate of one  of the parties, have worked together as  joint experts, or in another professional  capacity, including as arbitrators in the  same case. 4.4.4 The arbitrator has a relationship with one  of the parties or its afifliates through a  social media network.