Khawar Qureshi QC reports on how fraud & corruption are dealt with in the arbitral process
Many commentators have observed that fraud and corruption issues are becoming more evident in the context of international arbitration. Reasons for this could include the increased use of the arbitral process to deal with complex commercial matters, as well as the frequency with which states or state entities are parties to such contracts.
Nevertheless, the fact that the arbitral process is consent based and generally confidential in nature, coupled with the position that domestic courts in the states which are often called upon to enforce arbitral awards can only exceptionally review the artibral process, may mean that fraud and corruption issues cannot effectively be considered by the arbitral process.
Dealing with fraud by arbitration
Jurisdiction
This will depend on the arbitration clause. The English law position, as is the case in most jurisdictions, is clear: arbitrators can deal with fraud/bribery allegations, see Fiona Trust v Privalov [2007] All ER (D) 233 (Oct) and Bilta (UK) Ltd v Muhammad Nazir [2010] All ER (D) 146 (May).
Procedure
Many
