Social and Legal Studios
ISSN 2617-4162
e-ISSN 2617-4170
Publisher: Lviv State University of Internal Affairs
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the procedures for disclosure of evidence in the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC) court and the courts of England. The study used historical and comparative approaches, which made it possible to analyse the development of legal analysis methods, comparative research and contextual approaches to assess disclosure of documents practices in court proceedings, including an analysis of international norms such as the United Nations Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and the Hague Convention. The main focus was on the similarities and differences between these systems, as well as how they adapt to international standards. The results showed that the AIFC and English courts actively borrow elements of the English system, including the order of disclosure of evidence and arbitration mechanisms. However, these norms are adapted to national legislation and the requirements of foreign investors, taking into account the specifics of the legal system. At the same time, the English system has a long history and a high degree of specialisation in commercial disputes. The study emphasised that both systems aim for transparency and efficiency in court proceedings. The AIFC courts and the courts of England seek to adopt the best practices of English law, adapting them to local conditions. To improve procedures, it was recommended to take into account the modern needs of international trade and develop specialised methods of working with evidence. The results of the study can be used to improve disclosure of documents practices in judicial systems, in particular in the AIFC and English courts, with the aim of bringing them into line with modern international standards. Recommendations include developing specialised methods of working with evidence and taking into account the modern needs of international trade to improve the efficiency and fairness of court proceedings
Keywords: English courts; international standards; arbitration; rule of law
Suggested citation
[1] AIFC. (2018). AIFC court rules 2018. Retrieved from https://court.aifc.kz/uploads/3.-legislation-aifc-court-rules-2018.pdf.
[2] Alcolea, L.C. (2022). The rise of the international commercial court: A threat to the rule of law? Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 13(3), 413-442. doi: 10.1093/jnlids/idac022.
[3] Alina, B., & Malik, Z.-U. (2022). The establishment of the court of Astana international financial center (AIFC) in the wake of its precursors. Journal of Legal Studies, 29(43), 19-41. doi: 10.2478/jles-2022-0002.
[4] Bantekas, I. (2020). The rise of transnational commercial courts: The Astana international financial centre court. Pace International Law Review, 33(1). doi: 10.58948/2331-3536.1403.
[5] Callaghan, P. (2025). Why hash values are crucial in digital evidence authentication. Retrieved from https://blog.pagefreezer.com/ importance-hash-values-evidence-collection-digital-forensics.
[6] Chaisse, J., & Dimitropoulos, G. (2021). Special economic zones in international economic law: Towards unilateral economic law. Journal of International Economic Law, 24(2), 229-257. doi: 10.1093/jiel/jgab025.
[7] Civil Procedure Rules of United Kingdom. (1998, December). Retrieved from https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/3132/contents/made.
[8] Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2015, October). Retrieved from https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=34329053.
[9] Criminal Justice Law of United Kingdom. (1998, December). Retrieved from https://www.jerseylaw.je/laws/current/l_42_1998.
[10] Decision of the International Criminal Court in Case “The Prosecutor v. Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo”. (2008, August). Retrieved from https://www.icc-cpi.int/court-record/icc-01/05-01/08-55.
[11] Dimitropoulos, G. (2022). The design of international commercial courts. In S. Brekoulakis & G. Dimitropoulos (Eds.), International commercial courts: The future of transnational adjudication (pp. 251-277). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/9781009023122.013.
[12] ENRC v. SFO Court of Appeal Judgment. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.hfw.com/insights/enrc-v-sfo-court-of-appeal-judgment-september-2018/.
[13] European Convention on Human Rights. (1950, November). Retrieved from https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/convention_ENG.
[14] Frankel, R., Jennings, J., & Lee, J. (2021). Disclosure sentiment: Machine learning vs. dictionary methods. Management Science, 68(7), 4755-5555. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.2021.4156.
[15] Hague Convention. (1961, October). Retrieved from https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/full-text/?cid=41.
[16] Horislavska, I. (2025). Alternative consumer protection methods in the context of civil law recodification. Law. Human. Environment, 16(1), 90-104. doi: 10.31548/law/1.2025.90.
[17] Kamyshanskyi, V. (2025). Interoperability of CBDCs: Optimising Cross-Border Settlements through the lens of national and international regulation. Scientific Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs, 30(1), 34-44. doi: 10.63341/naia- herald/1.2025.34.
[18] Karamanian, S.L. (2022). International commercial courts, dispute resolution and the rule of law. In S. Brekoulakis & G. Dimitropoulos (Eds.), International commercial courts: The future of transnational adjudication (pp. 515-535). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/9781009023122.025.
[19] Kenzhaliev, M.Z. (2023). Legal regulation of the Islamic finances: Comparative analysis of the legal framework of the republic of Kazakhstan, “Astana” international financial centre and United Kingdom. Bulletin of the Institute of Legislation and Legal Information of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 4(75), 241-249. doi: 10.52026/2788-5291_2023_75_4_241.
[20] Kenzhaliyev, M. (2024). Perspectives of the court of the Astana international financial centre: Potential to transform the Central Asian legal landscape. Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 19(1), 160-179. doi: 10.1017/asjcl.2023.37.
[21] Ketners, K., Jargalsaikhan, Z., Miller, A., Miliienko, O., & Malkhasyan, L. (2025). Evaluation of effective anti-corruption strategies in state institutions. Ceridap, 1, 93-118. doi: 10.13130/2723-9195/2025-1-48.
[22] Kim, Y., Su, L., Wang, Z., & Wu, H. (2020). The effect of trade secrets law on stock price synchronicity: Evidence from the inevitable disclosure doctrine. The Accounting Review, 96(1), 325-348. doi: 10.2308/tar-2017-0425.
[23] Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 488-V “On Arbitration”. (2016, April). Retrieved from https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/ Z040000023_.
[24] Liu, Z., Wong, T.J., Yi, Y., & Zhang, T. (2021). Authoritarian transparency: China’s missing cases in court disclosure. Journal of Comparative Economics, 50(1), 221-239. doi: 10.1016/j.jce.2021.09.001.
[25] Lyon, T.D., Williams, S., & Stolzenberg, S.N. (2020). Understanding expert testimony on child sexual abuse denial after New Jersey v. J.L.G.: Ground truth, disclosure suspicion bias, and disclosure substantiation bias. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 38(6), 630-647. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2490.
[26] Makhambetsaliyev, D.B., Sagynbekova, G.M., Abdykadyr, U.B., Alimova, E.A., & Smanova, A.B. (2024). Constitutional law- making in the U.S. Supreme Court. Public Integrity, 26(4), 473-484. doi: 10.1080/10999922.2023.2282261.
[27] Marhaba, R., & Sairambaeva, Z. (2024). Legal mechanisms of functioning of the AIFC arbitration system. Journal of Actual Problems of Jurisprudence, 110(2), 173-181. doi: 10.26577/japj2024-110-b-016.
[28] Myrzakhmetova, A.M., Panzabekova, A.Z., Khalitova, M.M., & Smagulova, A.S. (2024). The analysis of modern macroeconomic environment in Kazakhstan: The influence of macroeconomic environment on economic behaviour. Bulletin of “Turan” University, 1, 69-83. doi: 10.46914/1562-2959-2024-1-1-69-83.
[29] Norval, C., Cornelius, K., Cobbe, J., & Singh, J. (2022). Disclosure by design: Designing information disclosures to support meaningful transparency and accountability. In FAccT 22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency (pp. 679-690). New York: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3531146.3533133.
[30] Ortner, H., & Hackl, M. (2024). Rule of law and international commercial arbitration. Zeitschrift für Europarechtliche Studien, 27(4), 486-516. doi: 10.5771/1435-439x-2024-4-486.
[31] Otynshiyeva, A.A., Ibrayeva, A.S., Castellino, J., Baimakhanova, D.M., & Baikenzheyev, A.S. (2019). International and legal aspects of citizenship on the basis of analysis of the legislation in Kazakhstan and Great Britain. International Journal of Public Law and Policy, 6(2), 138-154. doi: 10.1504/IJPLAP.2019.097539.
[32] Permatasari, В.K., Widhiyanti, H.N., & Widyanti, Y.E. (2025). Validity of digital agreements and the legal relations of the parties in affiliate marketing. Law Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs, 15(1), 59-71. doi: 10.63341/naia- chasopis/1.2025.59.
[33] Roux, C., Bucht, R., Crispino, F., De Forest, P., Lennard, C., Margot, P., Miranda, M.D., NicDaeid, N., Ribaux, O., Ross, A., & Willis, S. (2022). The Sydney declaration – revisiting the essence of forensic science through its fundamental principles. Forensic Science International, 332, article number 111182. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111182.
[34] Rules and Practice Directions. (1998, December). Retrieved from https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules.
[35] Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/Publications/Rules-of-Procedure-and-Evidence.pdf.
[36] Sabirov, K., Konussova, V., & Alenov, M. (2019). Between freedom of contract and the principle of good faith: An inside view on the reform of private law of Kazakhstan. JANUS NET E-Journal of International Relation, 2(10), 141-151. doi: 10.26619//1647-7251.10.2.10.
[37] Saniyazova, Y., Mediyev, R., Saitova, E., Utegenova, G., & Kzylkhojayeva, A. (2024). Advancing forensic science in Kazakhstan: The emergence and impact of digital forensics in cybercrime investigation. Law, State & Telecommunications Review, 16(2), 48-68. doi: 10.26512/lstr.v16i2.49190.
[38] Satayeva, A. (2023). Disclosure in civil proceedings in the UK and Kazakhstan: Comparative analysis. Statute Law Review, 44(3), article number hmad010. doi: 10.1093/slr/hmad010.
[39] Satayeva, A.B. (2022). Pre-action protocol in civil proceedings in England and Kazakhstan: A comparative analysis. Bulletin of Institute of Legislation and Legal Information of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 4, 268-275. doi: 10.52026/2788-5291_2022_71_4_268.
[40] Thomas, A., & Shearman, J. (2024). Disclosure in England and Wales: To discover, or to disclose? Retrieved from https://www.gtlaw-ediscoverywatch.com/2024/11/disclosure-in-england-and-wales-to-discover-or-to-disclose/.
[41] UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts. (2016). Retrieved from https://www.unidroit.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Unidroit-Principles-2016-Russian-bl.pdf.
[42] Valiyeva, S. (2024). On the court and international arbitration at the Astana international financial center for foreign investors in the oil and gas industry. SSRN. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4916664.
[43] Yesimkhanova, B., Zhetpisov, K., Erbolatov, E., Olzhabaev, Kh., & Azhibayeva, K. (2024). Criminal protection of secrecy: Kazakhstan and some European countries. Rivista di Studi Sulla Sostenibilita’, 14(2), 277-303. doi: 10.3280/riss2024-002016.
[44] Yeung, H.W., Bekmurzayeva, Z., Huang, X., & Suleimenova, D. (2018). Institutional development and the Astana International Financial Centre. SSRN. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3300104.
[45] 
Zambrana-Tévar, N. (2019). The court of the Astana International Financial Center in the wake of its predecessors. Erasmus Law Review, 12(1), 122-135. doi: 10.5553/elr.000125.