## Facts

- Reinsurers, including Hassneh Insurance Co. of Israel, and the assured, Steuart J. Mew, were parties to an English-law reinsurance contract containing an English arbitration clause.
- A dispute over coverage was arbitrated in England, resulting in an award (with reasons) rejecting Mew’s claim and favoring the reinsurers.
- After the arbitration loss, Mew sued a non-party broker involved in placing the reinsurance, alleging the broker caused him loss.
- Mew intended to rely in the broker litigation on the arbitration award and reasons and potentially other materials generated during the arbitration (e.g., pleadings, witness statements, transcripts).
- The reinsurers applied in the Commercial Court for injunctive relief to restrain Mew from disclosing the award(s), reasons, and other arbitration documents to the broker and in court proceedings.

## Issues

1. Whether English-law arbitration gives rise to an implied obligation of confidentiality restricting disclosure or use of arbitration materials outside the arbitration.
2. Whether the confidentiality obligation applies in the same way to (a) the award and reasons and (b) other documents created or exchanged in the arbitration.
3. What exceptions permit disclosure of arbitral materials in subsequent court proceedings, including litigation against a third party.
4. Whether an injunction should issue to restrain Mew’s threatened disclosures.

## Decision

- The court held that English-law arbitration carries an implied duty of confidentiality, distinct from the privacy of the hearing.
- The court treated the award and reasons as confidential, but subject to a qualified exception allowing disclosure when reasonably necessary to protect a party’s legitimate interests in subsequent proceedings.
- The court refused to enjoin Mew from using or disclosing the award and reasons to the extent necessary for the broker litigation.
- The court indicated stronger protection for other arbitration documents (e.g., pleadings, evidence, transcripts), for which broader disclosure to a third party would generally be restrained absent consent, court compulsion, or strict necessity.

## Legal Principles

- An arbitration agreement governed by English law implies an obligation that arbitration proceedings and materials remain confidential.
- Privacy of the hearing (no public access) is conceptually distinct from confidentiality (a legal restraint on dissemination and collateral use).
- The duty of confidentiality is not absolute; disclosure is permitted where reasonably necessary to protect or enforce a party’s legal rights (including in litigation against third parties) or where required by law or court order.
- Arbitral awards and reasons are presumptively confidential but may be deployed in court when legitimately necessary; documents generated for the arbitration typically receive more stringent protection and require a clearer justification for third-party disclosure.
- Injunctive relief is an available remedy to prevent disclosure exceeding what necessity and justice require.

## Conclusion

The Commercial Court recognized an implied confidentiality obligation in English arbitration, refused to bar necessary use of the arbitral award and reasons in related third-party litigation, and signaled that non-award arbitration materials are ordinarily subject to tighter restrictions and may be restrained by injunction if disclosure is not strictly justified.


Hassneh Ins. Co. of Isr. v. Mew, [1993] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 243 (Q.B. 1993)