Arbitrazh Courts Research Articles

Digital evidence and e-signature in the Russian Federation: a change in trend?

Alex Dolzhich considers the approach of the Arbitrazh Courts and the Arbitrazh Procedural Codes in relation to digital evidence.

Are Russian Courts Able to Keep Control over the Unruly Horse?

On 1 April 2013, the Higher Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation (HAC), Russia's highest commercial court, published Information Letter No. 156 dated 26 February 2013 on its website, in which it approved the Review of Arbitrazh Court Practice in Applying the Public Policy Exception as a Ground for Refusal to Recognize and Enforce Foreign Judgments and Arbitral Awards (the 'Review') and recommended that it be used as a guidance by all Russian Arbitrazh (commercial) Courts. Violation of public policy is one of the classic and perhaps the most frequently invoked objections to the recognition and enforcement in Russia of foreign judgments and arbitral awards. For this reason, it has been of vital importance for Russian court practice that a more precise definition of public policy, and the extent to which this concept should be applied, be formulated. The Review sets forth the legal positions of HAC based on specific cases where violation of public policy has been invoked. This article provides an overview of the main legal positions expressed in the Review.

The Nonarbitrability of Corporate Disputes in Russia

In a recent case, Novolipetsk Metallurgical Company v. Maximov Russia's highest commercial court, the Supreme Arbitrazh Court, has ruled that corporate disputes are not arbitrable in Russia. This article examines the Court's decision on the arbitrability of corporate disputes and contrasts it with other decisions in Russia and elsewhere that have broadened the scope of arbitrability. The conclusion is that the Maximov decision by Russia's highest commercial court makes Russia less hospitable to international commercial arbitration and runs counter to other measures being taken in Russia to make it a center for international commercial arbitration.

Proceedings with Participation of Foreign Persons in International Procedural Law of Russia and Kazakhstan

This article is dedicated to one of the most interesting aspects of International Procedural Law – litigation with participation of foreign persons. Author focused on a comparative analysis of Russian and Kazakh legislation concerning the regulation of international procedural relations. Article includes two paragraphs: the first one considers international jurisdiction of Russian arbitrazh courts and Kazakh economic courts on commercial matters; the second one examines the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in commercial matters on the territory of Russia and Kazakhstan. Author deeply scrutinized a wide range of legal documents including domestic legislation and multilateral international treaties of regional character in order to show the convergences and divergences in Russian and Kazakh law concerning participation of foreign persons in international commercial litigation.

Are Russian Courts Capable of Creating Precedents? Overcoming Inconsistency in Case Law

This article discusses the issue of the consistency of judicial decisions in two of Russia’s highest courts: the Supreme Court and the Higher Arbitrazh Court. The President of the latter has been especially vocal in advocating for the “introduction of the doctrine of precedent into Russian law”. This idea, understood as the power to bind lower courts by judgments in individual cases, has even received support from the RF Constitutional Court. However, this article stresses that before discussing whether there may—or may not—be a place for judicial precedent in Russia, the judgments of the two highest courts must be consistent. We examine one particular issue that lends itself to a number of possible solutions: the judicial review of internal circulars from federal bodies of executive power. The case law of the two courts has been marked by U-turns in dealing with this matter. They sometimes have issued completely different judgments in similar cases over a short period of time, while failing to explain why their rulings differ from earlier judgments. The author of the present article argues that this inconsistency gives witness to a number of fundamental flaws in judicial decisionmaking in Russia and undermines any discourse in support of precedent in Russia.

The Second-Look Doctrine in Russian Arbitrazh Courts

This article provides a brief description of the second-look doctrine and an analysis of its implications for the Russian legal system in terms of legislation, case law, and doctrine. It contains a review of existing judgments by Russian Arbitrazh courts on the issue, with an analysis of the courts’ reasoning with regard to the effects of the secondlook doctrine. The article ends by noting that Russian law allows for two different interpretations—minimalist and the mixed—of the doctrine. These approaches require a different standard for court review of arbitral awards involving antitrust matters.

The Push for Precedent in Russia's Judicial System

AbstractRussia is currently undergoing a spirited public debate over the role of precedent in a civil-law system. This article examines this debate from a theoretical and practical standpoint, exploring the nature of Russian court decisions and the extent to which they correspond to the Anglo-American theory of precedent. The article further analyzes how the Russian Higher Arbitrazh Court has carved out a narrow right to issue binding precedent and how this authority could impact Russia's civil-law understanding of such concepts as separation of powers and judicial independence.

History of International Commercial Arbitration and its Related System in Russia

Since the Law on International Commercial Arbitration was established on 7 July 1993 (‘1993 Law on the ICA’), several permanent arbitration courts which may deal with international commercial arbitration have been established and seem to be functioning well to settle international commercial disputes in Russia. All the permanent arbitral institutions for international commercial arbitration in Russia and the former USSR fell into the category of the treteiskii court. The history of the treteiskii court can be traced back to the fourteenth century. In this article, the history of international commercial arbitration and its related system in Russia will be explained chronologically, especially from the time of the Soviet regime to the contemporary period. The framework of the development of treteiskii courts also illustrates the recent rearrangement of jurisdiction relating to international commercial arbitration between the ordinary courts and the arbitrazh court. Currently, the issues relating to international commercial arbitration under articles 16–3 and 34–2 of the 1993 Law on the ICA are governed by ordinary courts; however, the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards are realised by arbitrazh courts in the Russian Federation. On the other hand, issues relating to domestic arbitration under the 2002 Statute on the Treteiskii Court are governed by arbitrazh courts or ordinary courts according to the kinds of disputes.

The Role of Courts in Adversarial Litigation in Russia

AbstractModern Russian arbitrazh court and civil court procedure (since 2002) has many adversarial characteristics, which are similar to those of British and American courts but which have their roots the Imperial Russian legal reform of 1864. This article offers the reader an analysis of the main features of Russian procedural legislation.

Are Russian Judges Still Soviet?

The Soviet model of judging incorporated an educational and political role for judges. In addition to resolving disputes, judges were expected to use cases as a way of inculcating Soviet values. They could sidestep the law when it conflicted with the interests of the state and/or the Communist Party. In recent years, reforms aimed at raising the status of judges and stripping away their Soviet veneer have been introduced. In theory, the introduction of the principle of adversarialism should shift responsibility away from judge and onto litigants. The article explores how these reforms have played out. It draws on field work in arbitrazh courts, including observations of judicial proceedings, conversations with judges and litigants, and review of case files.

Legal Contract Enforcement in the Soviet Economy

In present-day Russia, the arbitrazh courts appear to be a respectable and successful institution of contract enforcement. The Soviet state arbitration system was typically viewed as a purely administrative organisation that impeded the development of a contemporary system for legal contract enforcement. The analysis, however, suggests that the Soviet arbitration system was relatively well equipped to assist relationships between decentralised economic agents and had accumulated valuable experience that was the key for its successful performance in the 1990s. The system's activity increased in periods of liberalisation when state enterprises gained greater independence, and diminished during periods of revenant centralisation.

Chapter III. Consideration of Cases on Bankruptcy in the Arbitrazh Court

Chapter III. Consideration of Cases on Bankruptcy in the Arbitrazh Court

Judicial Power in Russia: Through the Prism of Administrative Justice

This article assesses the power of judges in Russia (on courts of general jurisdiction, arbitrazh courts, and military courts) in dealing with cases in which the government or one of its officials is a party. Power, that is, the resources of judges to make binding decisions, is understood as including jurisdiction, discretion, and authority to ensure compliance. The article analyzes the dramatic growth of jurisdiction and caseload in administrative justice in post-Soviet Russia to the year 2002 and examines how the courts have performed in handling the review of actions by officials (including in the military), tax cases, electoral disputes, and the legality of normative acts (both regulations and laws of lower governments), especially in the late 1990s. High rates of success for persons bringing suits against the government suggest that judges were able by and large to adjudicate fairly and rule against the state. To a considerable degree (but not always), those decisions were implemented (more often than were constitutional and commercial decisions). Interestingly, citizens who challenged the actions of officials in court had much more success than those who brought complaints to the Procuracy. Finally, the article develops an agenda for future research that would deepen understanding of the significance of administrative justice in the Russian Federation and the power of judges.

Enforcing Judgments in Russian Economic Courts

An expert on Russian law and politics uses data drawn from interviews with participants in non-payment cases heard by arbitrazh courts in Moscow, Saratov, and Yekaterinburg in 2000, after efforts made in the late 1990s to reform the enforcement system of the courts. The data are used to identify the strategies creditors use to collect payments awarded to them, the outcomes of such efforts, and managers' attitudes toward arbitrazh courts. Regional differences in creditors' ability to enforce these judgments, as well as patterns in debtor behavior and creditors' use of arbitrazh courts, are identified and analyzed.

Enforcing Judgments in Russian Economic Courts

An expert on Russian law and politics uses data drawn from interviews with participants in non-payment cases heard by arbitrazh courts in Moscow, Saratov, and Yekaterinburg in 2000, after efforts made in the late 1990s to reform the enforcement system of the courts. The data are used to identify the strategies creditors use to collect payments awarded to them, the outcomes of such efforts, and managers' attitudes toward arbitrazh courts. Regional differences in creditors' ability to enforce these judgments, as well as patterns in debtor behavior and creditors' use of arbitrazh courts, are identified and analyzed.

The Use of Courts by Russian Creditors

Arbitrazh courts have emerged as a low-cost and low-risk method for Russian creditors to collect routine debt from new customers.

Federal Constitutional Law of the Russian Federation “On the Arbitrazh Courts in the Russian Federation”

Federal Constitutional Law of the Russian Federation “On the Arbitrazh Courts in the Russian Federation”

Chapter IV. Authority and Procedure for the Formation and Activities of the Arbitrazh Courts of the Subjects of the Russian Federation

Chapter IV. Authority and Procedure for the Formation and Activities of the Arbitrazh Courts of the Subjects of the Russian Federation

Chapter 14. Organizational Provision for the Activities of the Arbitrazh Courts

Chapter 14. Organizational Provision for the Activities of the Arbitrazh Courts

Chapter 12. Consideration of Cases in the Presidium of the Higher Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation

"Chapter 12. Consideration of Cases in the Presidium of the Higher Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation." Statutes and Decisions, 38(6), p. 72