## Facts

- The matter was an international commercial arbitration administered by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) through its International Court of Arbitration.
- The arbitration is identified in secondary sources as **ICC Case No. 2930** and is commonly cited as **Award in ICC Case No. 2930**.
- The award was rendered in **1982** by an ICC arbitral tribunal (described in at least one index entry as a “panel of arbitration”).
- The award is reported (at least in extract or summary form) in the *Yearbook Commercial Arbitration* at **Vol. IX, p. 105**; the award date (1982) and the Yearbook volume year of publication may differ because Yearbook volumes often publish awards after the award date.
- Publicly accessible indices and listings generally identify the parties only as **“Claimant(s) v. Respondent(s)”** or equivalent generic labels, reflecting ICC confidentiality practice.
- Open sources reviewed do not disclose the parties’ names, the underlying contract or transaction, the specific claims and defenses, the governing law analysis, the relief awarded, or the tribunal’s reasoning.
- No open-source record was located showing any related set-aside, recognition, or enforcement proceedings in national courts tied to this case number and citation.

## Issues

1. Based on publicly accessible information, what reliable, non-speculative statements can be made about the identity, posture, and content of **Award in ICC Case No. 2930**?
2. Do the available public references indicate whether the 1982 decision was a final award on the merits or a non-final (interim or procedural) award?

## Decision

- An ICC arbitral tribunal issued an **award** in **1982** in **ICC Case No. 2930**.
- The award is indexed and cited in arbitration reporting sources, including **IX Y.B. Comm. Arb. 105**, and is also referenced in ICC award collections in bibliographic form.
- Publicly available materials do **not** provide enough detail to state the tribunal’s determinations on jurisdiction, liability, choice of law, damages, costs, or any other merits questions.
- The labeling of the document in public indices as an “award” (rather than an order) supports treating it as a dispositive decision, but open sources do not provide the text needed to confirm the scope (final merits award versus partial or interim award).

## Legal Principles

- ICC arbitration is commonly subject to confidentiality practices that limit public access to party names, pleadings, and full award texts; as a result, some ICC awards are known publicly mainly through citations and short published extracts.
- A standardized citation to the *Yearbook Commercial Arbitration* can reliably establish that an ICC award exists, the case number by which it is known in reporting services, and the award’s date and publication location, even when substantive details are not available without subscription access.
- When the award text and authenticated extracts are not accessible, a brief should avoid stating specific holdings, rules, or reasoning, because doing so would risk mixing this award with other ICC awards or relying on unsupported assumptions.
- The difference between an award date (here, 1982) and a Yearbook publication date is common in arbitration reporting and does not, by itself, indicate anything about the merits or procedural posture.

## Conclusion

*Award in ICC Case No. 2930, IX Y.B. Comm. Arb. 105 (1982)* is a 1982 ICC arbitral award known in open sources primarily through bibliographic references (including the *Yearbook Commercial Arbitration* citation) rather than through publicly available facts, holdings, or reasoning; accordingly, the public record supports only a limited description of the proceeding’s existence, forum, and citation, not a merits summary.
