Abstract
Abstract A question that continues to trouble and divide arbitral tribunals concerns the way in which they should or must conduct themselves in circumstances where they either suspect that the dispute before them is tainted by corruption, but neither party has raised allegations of corruption, or where a party simply asserts corruption, but does not attempt to particularize its allegations properly, let alone seek to substantiate them. These issues are not purely academic, they do arise in practice. The approaches that arbitral tribunals take in such situations vary greatly, with passive approaches eroding trust in the integrity and legitimacy of arbitration. This article seeks to contribute to the existing literature by providing an analytical framework by reference to applicable laws and rules to ascertain in what circumstances the duty of arbitral tribunals to raise or investigate their suspicions of corruption is triggered and explores the contours and content of the duty.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
