ABSTRACT
This chapter examines how linguistic issues are presently dealt with in the practice of international commercial arbitration (ICA) in the area of evidence. Evidence in legal sense divided into two great classes: written evidence, documents, and existing evidence. Oral testimonies are usually divided into three classes: parties' testimony, eyewitnesses' testimony and expert testimony. The first and second of those classes cause remarkable problems from a linguistic point of view, with direct effects on the legal assessment of procedural laws of the world evidence. But if techniques of taking testimony other than the well-known common law one are selected, the arbitrators should be under an even stricter duty to detail which rules they will apply for solving all the disputed elements emerging during the interrogatories: who will question first, whether there will be a cross-interrogatory although not in a common law environment, and again if a redirect and a recross, and how linguistic difficulties will be dealt with.
