The Russian Arbitration Reform: Between Lights and Shadows (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Yukos Arbitration Saga and Russia’s Constitutional Amendments
Juridica International
In February 2020, a Dutch appeals court ruled that the Russian state owed shareholders in the now-defunct Russian company Yukos 50 billion US dollars, one of the largest sums ever awarded. However, no country has yet been able to enforce the Yukos arbitral award issued in 2014 against Russia: while the arbitration tribunal in the Yukos investment case ruled in favour of the company, affirming that provisional application of the Energy Charter Treaty was compatible with Russian domestic law, Russia regards the matter as one of sovereignty and sees its power as being threatened. The article discusses whether non-enforcement of the award on the Russian government’s part would be justified by Article 15 (1) of the Russian Constitution and what impact the currently planned amendments to that foundational law might have with regard to international treaties and decisions of international bodies. The article concludes that the political and theory-oriented debate regarding Yukos will conti...
REFORMING THE LEGISLATION ON THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION OF UKRAINE: REALITIES OR MYTHS
2021
International commercial arbitration (ICA) is an alternative way to resolve foreign economic disputes. Initially, arbitration itself was seen as a neutral court in which the parties to the dispute were independent of national courts. Arbitration agreements and decisions must be recognised by national courts without any complications or review procedures. Although granting commercial parties some independence to agree that their dispute will be considered by independent arbitrators is a key principle in ICA, the struggle for supremacy between national laws and national courts on the one hand and the autonomy of the parties and the independence of the international arbitration system on the other continue. Over the years, national laws have sought to control, regulate, interfere with, or support ICA in various ways. To counter attempts to ‘localise’ ICA and promote equality in this area, private, professional institutions and international and intergovernmental organisations have developed a significant body of law designed to ensure self-government and dispute settlement procedures in ICA.
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.