IndexIntroductionConfidentialityEthicsPrivilegeConclusionThis essay seeks to discuss some of the ethical issues that dispute resolution practitioners must consider to avoid the pitfalls of impartiality. The article will examine the three key considerations of confidentiality, privilege and ethics. The essay will then conclude by examining some decisive cases. Arbitration is a usually (but not always) private arbitral process in which the parties to a dispute with each other choose the decision-makers (sometimes one, often a group of three) and the rules of procedure, evidence and adjudication by which their dispute will be addressed. be decisive. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay IntroductionArbitration as one of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms is used where an agreement cannot be reached, essentially to narrow down the issues in dispute. In recent years, arbitration has been the subject of much criticism from scholars and practitioners who have highlighted how a variety of legal, ethical, jurisprudential and sociological issues use the arbitration process, particularly because arbitration has gravitated from its primary historical form as a method of consensual dispute resolution between customary business parties to contractually provided forms of decision-making in disputes. These disputes range between consumers and banks, hospitals, schools, employers, airlines, securities sellers, and merchants of all sizes and shapes. These multiple variations and forms of arbitration in increasingly diverse contexts raise very significant questions about fairness, justice and ethics. the functioning of arbitration processes. There appears to be an “inaudible voice” that invariably carries forward the discussion on the ethics of arbitration, both in formal regulation and other forces capable of influencing the behavior of lawyers. Arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism mostly needs to be expressed in some form of rules, procedures, transparency, disclosure, sanctions and consequences if it is to be seen in some light of impartiality. These are the factors that give arbitration legal legitimacy as an efficient alternative to the court settlement process. Confidentiality First and foremost, practitioners of ADR processes such as arbitration are expected to act in good faith at all times, and maintaining confidentiality is a key aspect of acting in good faith. Confidentiality means that which is confidential both between the parties and between the parties and the arbitrator. Confidentiality generally means keeping all discussions private and secret; the contents of disclosed documents that will not be used as evidence; and information provided during the ADR process. Confidentiality is primarily the contractual right and obligation, express or implied under the arbitration agreement, augmented by common law, equity and statute. Indeed, in deciding whether or not to resort to arbitration, one of the most often examined issues has to do with the efficiency resulting from speed and low cost. However, many parties often cite confidentiality as the main driver of the decision. For example, in intellectual property and high-tech cases, as well as some more personal matters of sexual indiscretion, parties are more eager to resolve disputes without the public peeking into the details of a trade secret or business plan proposed or a confidential fact. .Maintaining confidentiality encouragesmeaningful participation and improves good outcomes. Respecting confidentiality is often believed to encourage full and frank discussion between parties on the issues in dispute and this can assist in resolving matters. A professional has an ethical obligation not to disclose information obtained during a private session unless clearly directed to do so by either party or where disclosure is otherwise required by law. In other words, what is said or done during the arbitration cannot be admitted into evidence at any hearing before a court or any tribunal unless the parties to the arbitration agree. The arbitration agreement, in fact, will bind both the parties and the neutral third party appointed pursuant to it. In general, the courts will lend their support to maintaining confidentiality except where it is necessary in the interests of justice for evidence to be given. Ethical consensus is the driving force behind arbitration and it has often been argued that it is wrong and immoral to impose arbitration clauses on those who have not voluntarily submitted to the process. Therefore, lawyers and sometimes judges who attempt to bind disputing parties to clauses to which they have not knowingly submitted are expected to behave unethically and inappropriately. Indeed, many commercial contracts now require or strongly recommend that parties seek arbitration before allowing a case to be placed on the trial docket. This makes perfect sense because if the parties don't like what happened in the arbitration, they are usually entitled to a trial de novo. Furthermore, there is debate as to whether or not a conflict of interest exists in the arbitral role where arbitrators are selected by the parties and therefore must impress the chosen parties sufficiently to be chosen again, especially if the arbitrator practices full-time and depends solely on the income arbitration. Conflict of interest is another ethical issue that arbitrators need to be aware of. In particular, the arbitral professional is expected to disclose all relationships he or she has had with the parties to the arbitration. One of the things a practitioner should watch out for is the temptation to engage in ex parte communications with one of the parties to the arbitration. While it is not advisable to arbitrarily and repeatedly appoint arbitrators, some arbitrators are repeat plaintiffs precisely because they possess extensive experience in the matters in dispute. Privilege Privilege in relation to arbitration means that if statements are made without prejudice, their contents cannot be entered into evidence without the consent of all interested parties. In litigation, lien often refers to an offer in compromise or a letter without cost savings lien. However, it is perfectly normal for some resolution discussions to be recorded and others not recorded and in this case part of the discussion will be privileged but the rest will not be. The basis of the no-privilege principle is that parties should be encouraged, so far as possible, to resolve their disputes without resorting to litigation and should not be discouraged in negotiations by the knowledge that anything said in the course of such negotiations could be used to their detriment during legal proceedings. A court may decide to admit or exclude evidence based on privilege. The court should respect applicable rules of privilege or professional ethics and other legal impediments. In an arbitration where there is the possibility of different applicable privilege laws, an arbitrator should apply a "most favored nation" approach.