In her 26-page opinion, the judge said, “Openness of civil trials promotes the integrity of the courts and the perception of fairness essential to their legitimacy.” She also asserted public access encouraged those possessing relevant information to come forward and discouraged perjury.
The ruling deals a blow to the Delaware’s attempts to expand the state’s legal industry. In 2009 Delaware’s legislature adopted private arbitrations as a means to preserve the state’s role in resolving business disputes. According to legal experts, Delaware is the first state to have private arbitrations before sitting judges. The system has been criticized for overstepping the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
With the new law, Delaware offered its Chancery judges to the legal industry as a better alternative to traditional private arbitration which is overseen by a lawyer or retired judge agreed upon by the parties. Proponents of the law claim that it would make Delaware a center for international arbitration. A line of thought reflected in the opinion of Larry Hamermesh, a professor at Widener Law School, “In an increasingly competitive global marketplace, the United States cannot afford to be at a competitive disadvantage in providing efficient ways for businesses to resolve their disputes.”
The five judges of the Chancery Court had been sued by the Delaware Coalition for Open Government, a group fighting for greater government transparency, which held that the private arbitrations at the Chancery Court amounted to “secret” hearings to settle big business disputes.
