Comparative analysis of disclosure of documents in the AIFC court and English courts: Impact on legal certainty in commercial disputes

The aim of this study was to compare the procedures for disclosure of evidence in the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC) court and the courts of England. The study used historical and comparative approaches, which made it possible to analyse the development of legal analysis methods, comparative research and contextual approaches to assess disclosure of documents practices in court proceedings, including an analysis of international norms such as the United Nations Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and the Hague Convention. The main focus was on the similarities and differences between these systems, as well as how they adapt to international standards. The results showed that the AIFC and English courts actively borrow elements of the English system, including the order of disclosure of evidence and arbitration mechanisms. However, these norms are adapted to national legislation and the requirements of foreign investors, taking into account the specifics of the legal system. At the same time, the English system has a long history and a high degree of specialisation in commercial disputes. The study emphasised that both systems aim for transparency and efficiency in court proceedings. The AIFC courts and the courts of England seek to adopt the best practices of English law, adapting them to local conditions. To improve procedures, it was recommended to take into account the modern needs of international trade and develop specialised methods of working with evidence. The results of the study can be used to improve disclosure of documents practices in judicial systems, in particular in the AIFC and English courts, with the aim of bringing them into line with modern international standards. Recommendations include developing specialised methods of working with evidence and taking into account the modern needs of international trade to improve the efficiency and fairness of court proceedings