ChatGPT 是一种专注于对话生成的语言模型，它能够根据用户的文本输入，产生相应的智能回答。其中GPT是Generative Pre-trained Transformer（生成型预训练变换模型）的缩写。近日我们通过向OpenAI提问的方式请ChatGPT就第三方资助与仲裁的关系进行回答。ChatGPT的答复涉及了第三方资助的几个突出问题，有一定的参考价值。
仲裁中的 TPF: 当前问题和发展趋势
（ChatGPT的回答）
近年来，第三方资助 (TPF) 已成为争议解决的一个重要方面。TPF 允许第三方（通常是投资基金）为一方的法律费用提供资金，以换取仲裁中任何裁决或和解的份额作为收益回报。TPF 已广泛用于国际仲裁，其中争议解决的成本可能很高。在本文中，我们将讨论第三方资助仲裁的当前问题和发展趋势。
当前问题
1、保密性：TPF 在仲裁中最重要的问题之一是保密性问题。第三方资助者可能会要求一方披露机密信息以评估案件的是非曲直，这可能会导致对仲裁程序保密性的担忧。一些司法管辖区出台了解决此问题的法规，要求各方披露第三方资助的存在。
保密问题的出现是因为第三方资助者通常需要获得与案件是非曲直相关的信息。这可能包括机密信息，例如当事人的策略、文件和证人证言。当事方可能不愿意向第三方资助者披露此信息，特别是如果他们不受与当事方和仲裁庭相同的保密义务的约束。
针对这一问题，一些法域出台了规定，要求当事人向仲裁庭和对方当事人披露第三方资助的存在。例如，国际律师协会 (IBA) 关于国际仲裁利益冲突的指南建议当事人披露任何第三方资助者的身份以及资助安排的性质和范围。
2、披露：披露问题与保密性密切相关。披露要求因司法管辖区而异，可能会影响各方获得 TPF 的能力。一些司法管辖区要求当事人向仲裁庭和另一方披露 TPF 的存在，而其他司法管辖区则不需要。这可能会导致不公平的竞争环境，一方知道另一方的资金安排，而另一方则不知道对方的资金安排。
披露问题可能会对各方获得 TPF 的能力产生重大影响。如果第三方出资者被要求披露其参与仲裁的情况，他们可能不愿意提供资金。这可能导致各方无法获得 TPF 或只能以不太优惠的条件获得 TPF 的情况。
为解决这个问题，一些司法管辖区出台了规定，要求当事方向仲裁庭和另一方披露 TPF 的存在。例如，IBA 关于国际仲裁利益冲突的指南建议当事人披露任何第三方资助者的身份以及资助安排的性质和范围。
3、控制权：当第三方资助者对仲裁结果有重大利益时，就会出现控制权问题。出资者可能会对当事人的决定和策略施加影响，从而导致对仲裁程序完整性的担忧。一些司法管辖区出台了解决此问题的法规，要求当事人披露第三方资助者参与仲裁的程度。
控制问题与保密问题密切相关。如果第三方出资者可以访问机密信息，他们可能会对该方的决策和策略施加影响。这可能导致对仲裁程序的完整性和仲裁庭做出公正决定的能力的担忧。
为解决这个问题，一些司法管辖区出台了规定，要求当事人披露第三方出资者参与仲裁的程度。例如，IBA 国际仲裁利益冲突指南建议当事人披露第三方资助者参与案件的程度，包括他们对当事人的决定和策略可能具有的任何控制或影响。
4、监管：监管问题与保密、披露和控制问题密切相关。一些司法管辖区缺乏监管导致人们担心 TPF 在仲裁中的道德和法律影响。这导致人们呼吁加强对仲裁中第三方资助的监管。
缺乏监管会对当事人、仲裁庭和第三方出资者产生重大影响。如果没有明确的规则和指南，各方可能不确定他们在 TPF 方面的义务和责任。这可能会导致混乱，并可能破坏仲裁过程的完整性。
为解决此问题，一些司法管辖区出台了规范 TPF 在仲裁中的使用的法规。例如，英国和新加坡出台了规定，要求当事人向仲裁庭和另一方披露 TPF 的存在。IBA 还引入了有关解决 TPF 问题的国际仲裁中的利益冲突指南。
发展趋势
1、TPF 的使用增加：近年来，TPF 在仲裁中的使用显着增加。随着各方越来越意识到 TPF 在争议解决中的好处，这种趋势可能会持续下去。TPF 允许当事方在不产生重大法律费用的情况下提出索赔，这在复杂的国际争端中特别有用。
TPF 使用的增加也导致第三方资助者之间的竞争更加激烈，从而降低了资助成本。这使得 TPF 更容易为中小型企业所接受，而这些企业以前可能无力承担争议解决的费用。
2、管辖区域的扩大：TPF 在仲裁中的使用正在扩展到新的管辖区域。传统上，TPF 主要用于普通法司法管辖区，例如英国、美国和澳大利亚。然而，TPF 现在正在德国、法国和荷兰等大陆法系司法管辖区使用。
TPF 扩展到新的司法管辖区导致资金安排更加多样化，因为不同的司法管辖区有不同的法规和准则来管理 TPF 的使用。这导致第三方资助者之间的竞争更加激烈，从而降低了资助成本。
3、更高的透明度：TPF 在仲裁中的透明度越来越高。这种趋势是由对保密性、披露和控制的担忧驱动的。当事人越来越多地向仲裁庭和另一方披露 TPF 的存在，这导致仲裁过程更加透明。
TPF 的更高透明度也导致对第三方资助者参与仲裁的更严格审查。第三方出资者越来越多地被要求披露他们参与仲裁的程度，包括他们可能对该方的决定和策略具有的任何控制或影响。
4、加强监管：在仲裁中加强对 TPF 监管的趋势越来越明显。这种趋势是由对 TPF 在争议解决中的道德和法律影响的担忧所驱动的。一些司法管辖区出台了规定，要求当事方向仲裁庭和另一方披露 TPF 的存在。
随着越来越多的司法管辖区出台管理 TPF 使用的法规和指南，在仲裁中对 TPF 的监管可能会继续加强。这可能会导致跨司法管辖区的资金安排更趋一致，这将使不同司法管辖区的各方更容易获得 TPF。
结论
第三方资助已成为国际仲裁争议解决的一个重要方面。虽然 TPF 可以为各方提供诉诸司法的机会并降低争议解决的成本，但它也引发了重大的道德和法律问题，例如保密、披露、控制和监管。
TPF 在仲裁中的当代问题包括对保密性、披露、控制和监管的担忧。这些问题密切相关，需要一个全面的监管框架才能有效解决。
仲裁中 TPF 的趋势包括增加使用、扩大辖区、提高透明度和加强监管。随着各方越来越意识到 TPF 在争议解决中的好处和风险，这些趋势可能会继续下去。
随着 TPF 在仲裁中变得越来越入流，当事人了解使用第三方资助的潜在利益和风险非常重要。各方在签订任何 TPF 协议之前应仔细考虑其条款，并应确保他们充分理解其在 TPF 方面的义务和责任。
此外，各方应了解 TPF 在争议解决中的潜在道德和法律影响。各方应对 TPF 的存在以及第三方出资者参与仲裁的程度保持透明。
为确保 TPF 在仲裁中仍然是一种合法且合乎道德的争议解决方式，监管机构必须引入明确而全面的指导方针和法规来管理 TPF 在仲裁中的使用。这将有助于解决对保密性、披露、控制和监管的担忧，并有助于维护仲裁过程的完整性。
总之，第三方资助已成为国际仲裁争议解决的一个重要方面。虽然 TPF 可以为各方提供诉诸司法的机会并降低争议解决的成本，但它也引发了重大的道德和法律问题。TPF 在仲裁中的当前问题和发展趋势需要一个全面的监管框架来有效解决。随着 TPF 在仲裁中变得越来越入流，当事人必须了解使用第三方资助的潜在利益和风险，并对 TPF 的存在和第三方资助者参与仲裁的程度保持透明。
TPF in Arbitration: Contemporary Issues and Trends
（Answers given by ChatGPT）
Third-party funding (TPF) has emerged as an important aspect of dispute resolution in recent years. TPF allows a third party, usually an investment fund, to finance a party's legal costs in exchange for a share of any award or settlement in the arbitration. TPF has been used extensively in international arbitration, where the costs of dispute resolution can be high. In this essay, we will discuss contemporary issues and trends in third-party funding in arbitration.
Contemporary Issues
1. Confidentiality: One of the most significant issues with TPF in arbitration is the issue of confidentiality. Third-party funders may require a party to disclose confidential information to assess the merits of the case, and this can lead to concerns about the confidentiality of the arbitration proceedings. Some jurisdictions have introduced regulations to address this issue, requiring parties to disclose the existence of third-party funding.
The issue of confidentiality arises because third-party funders typically require access to information that is relevant to the merits of the case. This can include confidential information such as the party's strategy, documents, and witnesses. Parties may be reluctant to disclose this information to third-party funders, particularly if they are not bound by the same confidentiality obligations as the parties and the tribunal.
In response to this issue, some jurisdictions have introduced regulations that require parties to disclose the existence of third-party funding to the tribunal and the other party. For example, the International Bar Association (IBA) Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration recommend that parties disclose the identity of any third-party funder and the nature and extent of the funding arrangement.
2. Disclosure: The issue of disclosure is closely related to confidentiality. Disclosure requirements vary across jurisdictions and can affect the parties' ability to obtain TPF. Some jurisdictions require parties to disclose the existence of TPF to the tribunal and the other party, while others do not. This can lead to an uneven playing field, where one party is aware of the other party's funding arrangements, and the other party is not.
The issue of disclosure can have significant consequences for the parties' ability to obtain TPF. Some third-party funders may be reluctant to provide funding if they are required to disclose their involvement in the arbitration. This can lead to a situation where parties are unable to obtain TPF or are only able to obtain it on less favourable terms.
To address this issue, some jurisdictions have introduced regulations that require parties to disclose the existence of TPF to the tribunal and the other party. For example, the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration recommend that parties disclose the identity of any third-party funder and the nature and extent of the funding arrangement.
3. Control: The issue of control arises when a third-party funder has a significant interest in the outcome of the arbitration. The funder may exert influence over the party's decisions and strategy, leading to concerns about the integrity of the arbitration process. Some jurisdictions have introduced regulations to address this issue, requiring parties to disclose the extent of the third-party funder's involvement in the arbitration.
The issue of control is closely linked to the issue of confidentiality. If a third-party funder has access to confidential information, they may be able to exert influence over the party's decisions and strategy. This can lead to concerns about the integrity of the arbitration process and the tribunal's ability to make an impartial decision.
To address this issue, some jurisdictions have introduced regulations that require parties to disclose the extent of the third-party funder's involvement in the arbitration. For example, the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration recommend that parties disclose the extent of the third-party funder's involvement in the case, including any control or influence they may have over the party's decisions and strategy.
4. Regulation: The issue of regulation is closely linked to the issues of confidentiality, disclosure, and control. The lack of regulation in some jurisdictions has led to concerns about the ethical and legal implications of TPF in arbitration. This has led to calls for greater regulation of third-party funding in arbitration.
The lack of regulation can have significant consequences for the parties, the tribunal, and the third-party funder. Without clear rules and guidelines, parties may be uncertain about their obligations and responsibilities regarding TPF. This can lead to confusion and potentially undermine the integrity of the arbitration process.
To address this issue, some jurisdictions have introduced regulations that govern the use of TPF in arbitration. For example, the UK and Singapore have introduced regulations that require parties to disclose the existence of TPF to the tribunal and the other party. The IBA has also introduced guidelines on conflicts of interest in international arbitration that address the issue of TPF.
Trends
1. Increased Use of TPF: The use of TPF in arbitration has increased significantly in recent years. This trend is likely to continue as parties become more aware of the benefits of TPF in dispute resolution. TPF allows parties to pursue their claims without incurring significant legal costs, which can be particularly useful in complex international disputes.
The increased use of TPF has also led to greater competition among third-party funders, which has driven down the cost of funding. This has made TPF more accessible to smaller and medium-sized businesses, which may have previously been unable to afford the costs of dispute resolution.
2. Expansion of Jurisdiction: The use of TPF in arbitration is expanding to new jurisdictions. Traditionally, TPF has been used primarily in common law jurisdictions, such as the UK, US, and Australia. However, TPF is now being used in civil law jurisdictions, such as Germany, France, and the Netherlands.
The expansion of TPF to new jurisdictions has led to greater diversity in funding arrangements, as different jurisdictions have different regulations and guidelines governing the use of TPF. This has led to greater competition among third-party funders, which has driven down the cost of funding.
3. Greater Transparency: There is a growing trend towards greater transparency in TPF in arbitration. This trend is driven by concerns about confidentiality, disclosure, and control. Parties are increasingly disclosing the existence of TPF to the tribunal and the other party, which has led to greater transparency in the arbitration process.
Greater transparency in TPF has also led to greater scrutiny of the third-party funder's involvement in the arbitration. Third-party funders are increasingly being required to disclose the extent of their involvement in the arbitration, including any control or influence they may have over the party's decisions and strategy.
4. Greater Regulation: There is a growing trend towards greater regulation of TPF in arbitration. This trend is driven by concerns about the ethical and legal implications of TPF in dispute resolution. Some jurisdictions have introduced regulations that require parties to disclose the existence of TPF to the tribunal and the other party.
Greater regulation of TPF in arbitration is likely to continue as more jurisdictions introduce regulations and guidelines governing the use of TPF. This is likely to lead to greater uniformity in funding arrangements across jurisdictions, which will make TPF more accessible to parties in different jurisdictions.
Conclusion
Third-party funding has emerged as an important aspect of dispute resolution in international arbitration. While TPF can provide parties with access to justice and reduce the costs of dispute resolution, it also raises significant ethical and legal issues, such as confidentiality, disclosure, control, and regulation.
Contemporary issues in TPF in arbitration include concerns about confidentiality, disclosure, control, and regulation. These issues are closely linked and require a comprehensive regulatory framework to address them effectively.
Trends in TPF in arbitration include increased use, expansion of jurisdiction, greater transparency, and greater regulation. These trends are likely to continue as parties become more aware of the benefits and risks of TPF in dispute resolution.
As TPF becomes more mainstream in arbitration, it is important for parties to understand the potential benefits and risks of using third-party funding. Parties should carefully consider the terms of any TPF agreement before entering into it and should ensure that they fully understand their obligations and responsibilities regarding TPF.
In addition, parties should be aware of the potential ethical and legal implications of TPF in dispute resolution. Parties should be transparent about the existence of TPF and the extent of the third-party funder's involvement in the arbitration.
To ensure that TPF in arbitration remains a legitimate and ethical means of dispute resolution, it is important for regulators to introduce clear and comprehensive guidelines and regulations governing the use of TPF in arbitration. This will help to address concerns about confidentiality, disclosure, control, and regulation and will help to maintain the integrity of the arbitration process.
In conclusion, third-party funding has become an important aspect of dispute resolution in international arbitration. While TPF can provide parties with access to justice and reduce the costs of dispute resolution, it also raises significant ethical and legal issues. The contemporary issues and trends in TPF in arbitration require a comprehensive regulatory framework to address them effectively. As TPF becomes more mainstream in arbitration, it is important for parties to understand the potential benefits and risks of using third-party funding and to be transparent about the existence of TPF and the extent of the third-party funder's involvement in the arbitration.
Done on 04/26/2023 12:25 pm EST
Free Research Preview. ChatGPT may produce inaccurate information about people, places, or facts. ChatGPT Mar 23 Version
声明：本文观点仅供参考，不可视为汇仲律师事务所及其律师对有关问题出具的正式法律意见。如您有任何法律问题或需要法律意见，请与本所联系。
汇仲律师事务所的网址为：
www.huizhonglaw.com
汇仲律师事务所的微信公众号为：
huizhonglawfirm
欢迎关注及浏览
