In an article published in Wolters Kluwer, Counsel Matteo Angelini discusses the scope of application of the rule in Browne v Dunn in international arbitration and offers lessons for practitioners.
In an article published in Wolters Kluwer, Counsel Matteo Angelini discusses the scope of application of the rule in Browne v Dunn in international arbitration and offers lessons for practitioners.
Excerpt: "The applicability of the rule inBrowne v Dunnin international arbitration remains controversial. This is because the customary approach to the taking of evidence in international arbitration does not lend itself well its application. There is a tendency towards chess-clock proceedings in international arbitration, which means that hearings are shorter with limited time for cross-examination. Those who argue against its application in arbitration point out that the rule cannot be fairly applied when a counsel is pressed for time, or has run out of time."
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.