The State and Business at Arbitrazh Courts (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Role of Judicial Interpretation in the “Competition” of Com¬mercial Courts in Russia
Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 2018
The purpose of the article is to discover the role of judicial interpretation of legal norms in dispute resolution based on the concept of opportunity costs, as well as to establish the existence of "competition" of Russian commercial courts. The concept of opportunity costs is essentially related to the process of choice. Opportunity costs exist when there are at least two courses of action, and the decision maker can select either course of action as his/her own choice. The value of the rejected choice is the opportunity cost of the choice. Interpretation of legal norms recognizes a set of techniques used to understand the essence of legal norms. In the opinion of the author, "competition" of commercial courts of Russia is a rivalry between legal opinions of judicial bodies based on interpretation of Russian legislation. The author conducted an economic and legal analysis of influence of judicial interpretation on the behavior of business and, thus, discovered "competition" between Russian commercial courts.
Are Russian Commercial Courts Biased? Evidence from a Bankruptcy Law Transplant
RePEc: Research Papers in Economics, 2007
We study the nature of judicial bias in bankruptcy proceedings following the enactment of the 1998 bankruptcy law in Russia. The two main findings are as follows. First, regional political characteristics affected judicial decisions about the number and types of bankruptcy proceedings initiated after the law took effect. Controlling for indicators of firms' insolvency and the quality of the regional judiciary, reorganization procedures were significantly more frequent in regions with politically popular governors and governors who had hostile relations with the federal center. Poor judicial quality was also associated with higher incidence of reorganizations. Second, the quality of the regional judiciary affected performance of firms under the reorganization procedure: in regions with low quality judges, firms that were reorganized according to the 1998 law had significantly lower growth in sales, labor productivity, and product variety compared to firms not subject to bankruptcy proceedings. In contrast, in regions with high quality judges, firms in reorganization outperformed firms not in bankruptcy proceedings. This effect of judicial quality on the performance of reorganized firms was stronger when governors were politically popular. These findings are consistent with the view that politically strong governors subverted enforcement of the 1998 bankruptcy law.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2014
Despite the judiciary's central role in the capitalist market system, micro-level empirical analyses of courts in post-socialist countries are remarkably rare. This paper draws on a unique hand-collected dataset of commercial claims filed at Slovenian courts to examine the determinants of two salient adjudicatory outcomes: whether a case was resolved via trial or settlement and if the case was tried, whether the plaintiff was awarded the initial claim. Consistent with the divergent expectations theory of litigation, we find that trial-based resolution is more likely when the case is complex and less likely when parties use mediation. Addressing sample selection and endogeneity concerns, we show that defendant's legal representation, plaintiff's profitability, and, importantly, court identity are robust predictors of plaintiff victory at trial. Thus, more than two decades after the start of transition in Slovenia, the judicial system is still a source of legal inconsistency and uncertainty.
Numerous survey studies with the participants in international arbitration indicate that arbitral awards are generally implemented with the consent of the losing party. The self-reliance of the arbitration process, including the fulfillment of the decisions, challenges the role of stateprovided social control. This study evaluates the role of state legal systems' support to the enforcement of arbitral awards, in the formation of "voluntary compliance behavior" that-at first glance-gives the impression of functioning independently of the state, using various concrete data. In the examinations conducted, the fundamental question is the extent to which arbitration can find a space within various understandings of different states; in this context, the evaluation of the quantity of the contribution of state judiciary's impact in the success of arbitration mentioned above. At the same time, the effectiveness of sanctions imposed independently by private social control systems is also considered. It is concluded that the the stance taken by states towards arbitral awards is a key determinative factor in the strategic behaviors of the actors of international trade.
The Russian Arbitration Reform: Between Lights and Shadows
Russian Law Journal
Russian system of alternative disputes resolution has experienced relevant development over the last few years. On December 2015, the Russian President signed two laws, which entered into force on 1 September 2016 and substantially reshaped the legal framework for arbitration in the Russian Federation. These are the Federal Law on Arbitration and the Federal Law on Amending Certain Legislative Acts, which introduced amendments to various laws including International Commercial Arbitration Law, Arbitrazh (Commercial) Procedural Code and Civil Procedural Code. The present article provides a comment on the key changes introduced by the said reform, compared to the previous state-of-play. Special attention has been given to the validity of the arbitration agreement, the arbitrability of international disputes and the denial of enforcement of an arbitral award for matters of public policy. Starting from the evolution of the Russian Supreme Court’s approach to the ground for refusal of en...
Russian Law Journal, 2017
The Court of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU Court) is a new structure operating since 2015, and whose mission is to ensure the uniform interpretation and application of EAEU law. The article focuses on the main challenges the Court is presently facing: limited competence; a lack of procedural mechanisms to ensure the dissemination of its case-law among national courts; and a low number of applications. Consequently, it is divided into three sections. The first section is devoted to an analysis of the Court's competence and focuses on the loss of the preliminary reference procedure that existed under the EurAsEC law. The authors analyze its role and the possibility of compensating for its lost powers. The second section explores the other tools available to the Court in order to influence the case-law of national courts indirectly. It explores the practical difficulties which economic entities face when bringing parallel proceedings before the EAEU Court and a national court, or when trying to obtain a review of a national court judgment following a positive outcome in the EAEU Court. The third section tackles the issue of the low number of applications, linked to a lack of trust from the business and legal communities. Thus, it is vital for the Court to earn a reputation based on accessibility, professionalism and efficiency. To this end, the authors analyze such issues as the duration of proceedings, the locus standi of economic entities and the way in which judgments should be drafted to ensure the protection of rights and legitimate interests of economic entities.
The Emergence of the Rule of Law in Russia
2013
This retrospective paper challenges the favourable view about Russia's commercial courts (arbitrazhnye sudy) held by Kathryn Hendley and her colleagues. Their argument - based on a quantitative analysis - was presented in their highly cited paper “Law, Relationships and Private Enforcement: Transactional Strategies of Russian Enterprises” in Vol. 52, No. 4, Europe-Asia Studies in 2000. In this paper I use quantitative data from the late 1990s to test the validity of Hendley's claims, and conclude that an unfavourable view of the state of the courts is warranted. The proposed explanation (social mechanism) makes sense of the finding that those who trust the courts tend to believe that corruption is a fact of life and an acceptable method for getting things done. Global Crime, Vol.14, No.1, 2013, pp. 82-109. Published online by Taylor & Francis: 7 February, 2013.""