IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bcp/journl/v9y2025issue-7p6369-6381.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Confidentiality in e-Arbitration: A Comparative Analysis of Malaysia, China and the United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Norsyazwani Mohamad Nazri

    (Faculty of Law, University Technology MARA, Shah Alam Malaysia)

  • Nur Ezan Rahmat

    (Faculty of Law, University Technology MARA, Shah Alam Malaysia)

  • Saidatun Nadia Ahmad Shukri

    (Faculty of Law, University Technology MARA, Shah Alam Malaysia)

  • Pairus Samsudin

    (Legal Department, Wastech Multigreen Sdn Bhd)

Abstract

The widespread of COVID-19 pandemic has entailed a new normal in global dispute resolution including arbitration. In enhancing the access to justice, several established arbitration centres have implemented electronic arbitration or e-arbitration in their regions. Compared to traditional arbitration proceedings, e-arbitration is conducted in an online environment with the assistance of advanced technology. Nevertheless, the use of technology has brought with it the issue of confidentiality. The Arbitration Act 2005 is the current law governing arbitration in Malaysia. By adopting qualitative research methodology, this article seeks to examine whether the existing Malaysian legal framework sufficiently provides for online arbitration and whether such legal framework is adequate to govern the issue of confidentiality. For comparative analysis, this article further scrutinised the position in other jurisdictions, particularly China and the United Kingdom. The collected data will then be critically analysed using the content analysis method. Subsequently, this article provides recommendations for Malaysia to administer e-arbitration on a full-fledged basis with the issue of confidentiality not being compromised.

Suggested Citation

  • Norsyazwani Mohamad Nazri & Nur Ezan Rahmat & Saidatun Nadia Ahmad Shukri & Pairus Samsudin, 2025. "Confidentiality in e-Arbitration: A Comparative Analysis of Malaysia, China and the United Kingdom," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 9(7), pages 6369-6381, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bcp:journl:v:9:y:2025:issue-7:p:6369-6381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/Digital-Library/volume-9-issue-7/6369-6381.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/articles/confidentiality-in-e-arbitration-a-comparative-analysis-of-malaysia-china-and-the-united-kingdom/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bcp:journl:v:9:y:2025:issue-7:p:6369-6381. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dr. Pawan Verma (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.