Almost a decade ago, U.S. courts seemed to view with reluctance court-ordered production of evidence in light of the particular nature of international arbitration and the preservation of the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the arbitral process.

Notwithstanding the strong tradition of judicial intervention in the United States, the courts favored a restrictive approach to judicial intervention in international arbitration for the gathering of evidence, leaving the control of the arbitral process, including the production of evidence, to the arbitrators (see E. Gaillard, “Court-Ordered Production of Evidence,” NYLJ, April 1, 1999; see also E. Gaillard and J. Savage (eds.), “Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration,” Kluwer, 1999, ��1302-1345).

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]