The Arbitrator’s Jurisdiction in Uncovering Fraudulent Evidence: In Light of the Practices of the International Chamber of Commerce

When parties to a dispute select arbitration as their means of resolving the conflict, they relyon evidentiary materials to present claims or defenses. In this context, the likelihood of oneparty engaging in fraudulent practices in the presentation of evidence and utilizing fraudulentmaterials to influence the arbitration process is significant. According to the arbitration practicesof the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), it has been established that an arbitratorlacks independent and direct authority to uncover such fraudulent evidence. However, whenthe opposing party challenges the evidence as fraudulent and raises allegations of fraud in thearbitration, the arbitrator is obliged to address this objection and examine the validity of eachpiece of evidence according to its nature. Failure by the arbitrator to consider such evidence canundermine the credibility and value of the arbitral award. When the award issued by the arbitrationauthority is tainted by falsehood and fraud, it loses its enforceability. Therefore, delineating thescope of the arbitrator’s authority in the face of fraudulent evidence is of paramount importance.Analyzing arbitration practices and the conduct of arbitrators, particularly within the frameworkof the ICC when confronted with fraudulent evidence, will ultimately contribute to theestablishment of a unified procedure. This article employs a descriptive-analytical methodology,utilizing library resources to address the question of what the scope of the arbitrator’s jurisdictionis in uncovering fraudulent evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Published
2025-06-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.22091/ijicl.2025.11824.1112
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Arbitrator’s Jurisdiction in Uncovering Fraudulent Evidence: In Light of the Practices of the International Chamber of Commerce

Ahmad Reza Tohidi, maryam brojerdi
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
International Arbitration and Investment Law
article

The Arbitrator’s Jurisdiction in Uncovering Fraudulent Evidence: In Light of the Practices of the International Chamber of Commerce

Ahmad Reza Tohidi, maryam brojerdi
article en

Abstract

When parties to a dispute select arbitration as their means of resolving the conflict, they relyon evidentiary materials to present claims or defenses. In this context, the likelihood of oneparty engaging in fraudulent practices in the presentation of evidence and utilizing fraudulentmaterials to influence the arbitration process is significant. According to the arbitration practicesof the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), it has been established that an arbitratorlacks independent and direct authority to uncover such fraudulent evidence. However, whenthe opposing party challenges the evidence as fraudulent and raises allegations of fraud in thearbitration, the arbitrator is obliged to address this objection and examine the validity of eachpiece of evidence according to its nature. Failure by the arbitrator to consider such evidence canundermine the credibility and value of the arbitral award. When the award issued by the arbitrationauthority is tainted by falsehood and fraud, it loses its enforceability. Therefore, delineating thescope of the arbitrator’s authority in the face of fraudulent evidence is of paramount importance.Analyzing arbitration practices and the conduct of arbitrators, particularly within the frameworkof the ICC when confronted with fraudulent evidence, will ultimately contribute to theestablishment of a unified procedure. This article employs a descriptive-analytical methodology,utilizing library resources to address the question of what the scope of the arbitrator’s jurisdictionis in uncovering fraudulent evidence.

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
University of Qom (IR)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.