O papel da soft law sobre produção de provas na arbitragem internacional como ferramenta de atenuação de diferenças jurídico-culturais

• Ano de defesa: 2025
• Autor(a) principal: Freitas, Isabella Rodrigues
• Orientador(a): Aurelli, Arlete Inês
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito
• Departamento: Faculdade de Direito
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Arbitragem; Produção probatória; Soft law; Diferenças jurídico-culturais; Harmonização
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Arbitration; Taking of evidence; Soft law; Cross-cultural legal differences; Harmonization
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/45387

This dissertation aims to identify the main differences in evidence-taking between the civil law and common law traditions and, from this starting point, to analyze how soft law instruments seek to harmonize the contrasts between both systems within the context of arbitration. The evidentiary phase plays a decisive role in resolving a significant portion of disputes, a reality that becomes even more pronounced in arbitration proceedings due to their complexity. Nevertheless, a review of arbitration laws in various jurisdictions reveals that they provide only limited regulation regarding evidentiary matters. The same can be observed in the arbitration rules of numerous arbitral institutions around the world. The scarcity of rules governing the evidentiary phase of arbitration is deliberate, as it aims to foster the flexibility that characterizes arbitration as a method of dispute resolution. However, in arbitral proceedings involving players (i.e., actors such as parties, witnesses, experts, counsel, or arbitrators) from different legal traditions, the absence of detailed provisions in hard law can lead to a misalignment of expectations – expectations often shaped, whether directly or unconsciously, by the judicial systems to which each actor is accustomed. This is where soft law (a term used to refer to non-binding best practice guides, recommendations, protocols, codes of conduct, and similar instruments) on the taking of evidence becomes especially relevant. Such instruments provide more detailed guidance, contributing to greater predictability and legal certainty in arbitral proceedings, and preventing legal-cultural clashes. Accordingly, this dissertation seeks to investigate the extent to which soft law – specifically the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration and the Prague Rules on the Efficient Conduct of Proceedings in International Arbitration – may be regarded as a bridge between civil law and common law traditions in the realm of evidence-taking, harmonizing practices and expectations among participants, particularly from the perspective of Brazilian practice