IBA RULES ON THE TAKING OF EVIDENCE IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION

The International Bar Association (IBA) publishes Rules on challenging issues such as the taking of evidence in international commercial arbitration.

We are grateful to the IBA which has kindly allowed us to publish the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration as a resource for parties and their representatives and for arbitral tribunals acting under the NZDRC Arbitration Rules.

When acting under NZDRC’s Arbitration Rules, the Arbitral Tribunal may have regard to, but is not bound to apply, the International Bar Association Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Commercial Arbitration current at the Commencement Date.

IBA Rules on Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration

In 2010 the International Bar Association adopted the new IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration, which superseded the 1999 Rules. The revised Rules apply to all arbitrations in which the parties agree to apply the IBA Rules after 29 May 2010, whether as part of new arbitration agreements or in determining the rules of procedure in a pending or future arbitration.

 

Access the IBA Rules on Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration

DOWNLOAD

Other resources you might like

If you found this article helpful and are interested in learning more, there is a wealth of other resources available on our website. We have a wide array of articles and guides on a variety of topics, each designed to provide you with a deeper understanding of the subject matter. We encourage you to explore these resources and deepen your knowledge.

Two construction workers stand in an unfinished building. One worker, in a red shirt and red helmet, converses with another worker, in a dark shirt, blue overalls, and a white helmet. The white-helmeted worker gestures while explaining something. Tools and materials are visible in the background.
General

Council wins in battle with contractor

In Thomas Barnes & Sons plc v Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council [2022] EWHC 2598 (TCC) the English High Court dismissed a claim for wrongful termination from a contractor despite agreeing that they were entitled to an extension of time.
Learn more
A man wearing an orange hard hat and a white shirt with a black tie points to a large screen displaying architectural plans. He is standing in a modern office space, explaining the details of the design.
Adjudication

Southern Summary Judgment Stoush

In the Invercargill High Court, in Northlake Investments Limited v Civil Construction Limited [2023] NZHC 2715, a developer and contractor battled in substantive proceedings following an adjudication under the Construction Contracts Act 2002 (the Act). The key issue was whether an adjudicator’s determination on a disputed payment claim was not binding because the contractor had not complied with the contractual procedures for referral to adjudication, or whether the Act overrode those contractual procedures.
Learn more
The image shows the iconic Big Ben clock tower in London on a cloudy day. Surrounding the clock tower are other historic buildings of the Houses of Parliament, with several birds flying nearby. The scene captures a classic view of central London's architecture.
Arbitration

Is a party required to accept non-contractual performance during a force majeure event?

The English Court of Appeal made waves in the last part of 2022 with its decision in MUR Shipping BV v RTI Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1406. On a non-unanimous basis, the Court of Appeal held that a party had not been entitled to rely on a force majeure clause to suspend performance. While the decision turned on the drafting of the particular force majeure clause in question, it attracted widespread attention because of its finding that the party should have accepted an offer of non-contractual performance.
Learn more

Sign up for our newsletter​