国际商会仲裁院发布了新版《当事人和仲裁庭在国际商会仲裁规则下参与仲裁程序的指引》

《当事人和仲裁庭在国际商会规则下参与仲裁程序的指引》（以下简称《指引》）就《国际商会规则》下进行的仲裁向当事人和仲裁庭提供了实际指导，并概述了国际商会仲裁院（ICC）的做法。2018年10月25日和26日在巴黎举行的国际商会仲裁院年度工作会议上，根据国际商会仲裁院主席亚历克西斯·穆雷（Alexis Mourre）和国际商会仲裁院秘书处的提议，对最新情况进行了讨论。

修订后的《指引》要点

（1）仲裁员和候选仲裁员的披露（第24段）

该《指引》明确，不仅应当披露当事人及其关联公司，而且还应当披露与仲裁结果有利害关系的非当事人。关于这方面，该《指引》强调了秘书处在仲裁开始时确定“相关实体”清单的做法。这种做法的目的是协助准仲裁员为其披露做准备。然而，秘书处所确定的上述实体并不一定意味着该实体与范围或披露有关，也不意味着对秘书处未指明的其他非缔约方无需进行披露。最后，应由候选仲裁员评估是否应披露非当事人。如《指引》所指出的，候选仲裁员如有疑问，可与秘书处联系

（2）与仲裁庭组庭有关的服务（第32-33段）：

根据《国际商会规则》，各方当事人可以协商指定一名独任仲裁员或首席仲裁员，由国际商会法院确认。在这种情况下，《指引》指出，秘书处可通过提出可能的候选人或提供关于已确定候选人的非机密信息来协助各方当事人。

在双方当事人未就指定一名独任仲裁员或首席仲裁员达成协议的情况下，将由国际商会法院来指定。但是，在某些情况下，允许当事人参与选择过程仲裁员。为此，各方当事人可商定，在秘书处的参与下指定仲裁员，特别是通过提供名单方式进行委任。

（3）透明度：

《指引》中包含了两项重要的创新。

第一，从2019年7月1日起，在国际商会仲裁院网站上公布的有关仲裁庭组成的现有信息的基础上将公开所涉行业和当事人的代理律师，进行完善（第36段）。

第二，自2019年1月1日起作出的所有裁决，可在发布之后两年，根据选择退出程序原则予以公布（第40-46段）。当事人可以约定更长或更短的期限。当事人可以随时反对公布裁决书，或者要求对裁决书进行审查或者修订。在这种情况下，将不公布裁决，或者按照当事人协议进行处理或修订之后公布。

在作出裁决通知时，以及任何公布裁决之前，将告知当事人这一具体做法以及他们提出异议的权利。在有保密协议的情况下，秘书处将征求他们的特别意见。秘书处还可决定在某些行业部门或在敏感案件征求其具体意见，不予公布裁决。

（4）数据保护（第80-91段）：

《指引》中有一个全新的章节专门涉及遵守《欧洲联盟一般数据保护条例》（GDPR）的规定。《指引》特别明确，如果同意参加国际商会仲裁院的仲裁，当事人、代理人、仲裁员、行政秘书、证人、专家以及可能以任何身份参与仲裁的任何其他个人，他们的个人资料将被收集、转移、存档，并视情况予以公布。

该《指引》还提醒各方当事人，他们有义务确保上述个人了解并同意使用其个人数据。为此，仲裁庭应在仲裁过程中的适当时候提醒当事人和仲裁的其他参与者，他们的数据可能被使用，并提醒他们根据GDPR的规定请求改正或禁止使用这些数据。特别鼓励在职权范围中列入一项具有此种效力的条款，秘书处可以推荐一项示范条款。

（5）基于条约仲裁和法庭之友（amici curiae）的意见（第139-143段）：

国际商会仲裁院管理越来越多投资者诉国家的仲裁案件，《指引》在这方面提出了进一步的指导意见。

首先，为了透明起见，鼓励候选仲裁员在其简历中披露他们作为仲裁员、专家或律师参与的基于条约的案件的完整清单。

《指引》还具体规定，当事人可以在国际商会仲裁中约定全部或部分适用《贸易法委员会透明度规则》（以下简称《规则》），在这种情况下，秘书处可以作为存储地。

至于国际商会仲裁院对裁决草案的核阅，鉴于投资仲裁的特殊性，基于条约的裁决将在该领域具有具体经验的国际商会仲裁院委员在内的全体会议上进行审查。还规定，基于条约的裁决可在发布后6个月内公布，而不是适用于其他裁决的两年。

最后，《指引》明确指出，根据《规则》第25（3）条，仲裁员有权在与当事各方协商后听取法庭之友的意见。

（6）行政秘书的职责（第183-188段）

该《指引》先前的版本有时被认为对可能委托给行政秘书的任务有不适当的限制。修订后的《指引》明确，行政秘书可在仲裁庭的控制下，履行诸如起草信函和代表仲裁庭发送信函等任务，并为仲裁庭审查程序令草案以及裁决的事实部分（如程序摘要、事实年表和当事人立场的摘要）做好准备。然而，绝对不允许任何仲裁庭将其决策职能的全部或部分委托给秘书，秘书的任务在任何情况下都不得免除仲裁员亲自审阅文件的义务。

【英文原文】

The International Court of Arbitration of the International has released updates to its Note to Parties and ArbitralTribunals on the Conduct of Arbitration under the ICC Rules of Arbitration,effective 1 January 2019

The Note provides parties and arbitral tribunals with practical guidance concerning the conduct of arbitrations under the ICC Rules and summarises the practices of the ICC Court. The updates were discussed by the Bureau of the ICC Court during its annual Working Session which took place in Paris on 25 and 26 October 2018, further to proposals made by ICC Court President Alexis Mourre and the ICC Court Secretariat.

The salient points of the revised Note are as follows:

a) Disclosures by arbitrators and prospective arbitrators (par. 24):

The Note clarifies that disclosures should be made not only with respect to the parties and their affiliates, but also to non-parties having an interest in the outcome of the arbitration. In this regard, the Note highlights the practice of the Secretariat to identify, at the outset of the arbitration, a list of “relevant entities”. That practice is meant to assist prospective arbitrators in preparing their disclosures. The identification of said entities made by the Secretariat, however, does not necessarily mean that the mentioned entities are relevant for the scope or disclosures, or that disclosures should not be made with regard to other non-parties not identified by the Secretariat.Ultimately, it is for the prospective arbitrator to assess whether disclosures should be made in respect of non-parties. As the Note points out, prospective arbitrators may contact the Secretariat in case of doubt

b) Additional services in respect of the constitution of arbitral tribunals (par. 32-33):

Under the ICC Rules, parties may agree to nominate a sole arbitrator or a presiding arbitrator for confirmation by the ICC Court. In such case, the Note sets out that the Secretariat may assist the parties by proposing possible candidates or providing non-confidential information on identified candidates.

In absence of an agreement between the parties on the appointment of a sole arbitrator or a presiding arbitrator, such appointment will be made by the ICC Court. It may in certain cases be desirable, however, to allow the parties to be involved in the selection process. To that effect, the parties may agree that the appointment will be made with the Secretariat’s involvement, particularly by way of a list procedure.

c) Transparency:

Two important innovations have been included in the Note.

First, as from 1 July 2019, the already existing information published onthe ICC Court’s website as to the composition of ICC tribunals will be enriched by the sector of industry involved and the identity of counsel representing the parties (par. 36).

Second, all awards made as from 1 January 2019 may be published, no less than two years after their notification, based on an opt-out procedure (par.40-46). The parties may agree to a longer or shorter time-period. Any party may at any time object to publication of an award, or request that the award be sanitized or redacted. In such a case, the award will either not be published or be sanitized or redacted in accordance with the parties’ agreement.

The parties will be specifically informed of this practice and of their right to object at the time of notification of the award, as well as in advanceof any publication. In the presence of a confidentiality agreement, the Secretariat will seek their specific consent. The Secretariat may also decide to seek specific consent, of exempt an award from publication, in certain sectors of industry or in sensitive cases.

d) Data protection (par. 80-91):

An entire new section of the Note is devoted to compliance with European Union General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) regulations. In particular, the Note clarifies that by accepting to participate in an ICC Arbitration, parties,their representatives, arbitrators, the administrative secretary, witnesses,experts and any other individuals that may be involved in any capacity in the arbitration accept that their personal data will be collected, transferred,archived and as the case may be, published.

The Note further reminds parties of their duty to ensure that said individuals are aware and accept the use of their personal data. Arbitral tribunals shall to that effect, at an appropriate time in the arbitration, remind the parties and other participants in the arbitration that their data may be used, as well as of their right under the GDPR Regulation to seek the correction or suppression of the same. It is in particular encouraged to include a clause to the effect in the Terms of Reference and the Secretariat is available to recommend a model clause.

e) Treaty-Based arbitrations and submissions by amici curiae (par.139-143):

The ICC Court administers a growing number of investor-State arbitrations, and the Note introduces some further guidance in this respect.

Prospective arbitrators are first of all encouraged, for the sake of transparency, to disclose in their CV a complete list of treaty-based cases in which they participated as arbitrator, expert or counsel.

The Note also specifies that the parties may agree in an ICC Arbitration to apply in all or part the UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency, and that the Secretariat may in such a case act as repository.

As to scrutiny of draft awards by the ICC Court, in view of the specificityof investment arbitration, treaty-based awards will be scrutinized in a plenary session including ICC Court members having specific experience in the field. Itis also provided that treaty-based awards may be published six months after their notification, rather than the two years applicable for other awards.

Finally, the Note makes it clear that, pursuant to Article 25(3) of the Rules, arbitrators have the power, after consulting the parties, to hearsubmissions by amici curiae.

f) Duties of administrative secretaries (par. 183-188):

The previous version of the Note has at times been perceived as unduly restrictive of the tasks that may be entrusted to an administrative secretary.The revised Note clarifies that administrative secretaries may, under the control of the arbitral tribunal, perform tasks such as drafting correspondence and sending it on behalf of the tribunal, and preparing for the tribunal’s review drafts of procedural orders as well as of factual portions of the award, such as the summary of the proceedings, the chronology of facts and the summary of the parties’ positions. It, however, remains strictly impermissible for any tribunal to delegate all or part of its decision-making functions to the secretary, whose tasks shall in no circumstance release the arbitrators from their duty to personally review the file.

 By ICC 

                                                                                                               来源：微信公众号 临时仲裁ADA