Archive for October, 2013

More on Asymmetrical Arbitration Clauses from the Russian Courts

More on Asymmetrical Arbitration Clauses from the Russian Courts

In 2012 the Supreme Commercial Courts famously voided a dispute resolution clause, which entitled only one of the parties to choose between arbitration and litigation. Now the Russian courts have to decide whether to enforce a clause, which provides that the buyer should submit all its claims to arbitration, while the supplier should litigate any […]

Turkmenistan: Two Recent Decisions on Jurisdiction Prove that the BIT Matters
By 22 October, 2013 0 Comments Read More →

Turkmenistan: Two Recent Decisions on Jurisdiction Prove that the BIT Matters

This summer ICSID tribunals resolved jurisdictional challenges in two cases arising out of construction projects in Turkmenistan. In Kilic Insaat Ithalat Ihracat Sanayi ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi v Turkmenistan (ICSID Case No. ARB/10/1) the tribunal decided that it does not have jurisdiction. It held that the investor failed to litigate its claims in the Turkmen courts […]

A Landmark Decision on Validity and Enforcement of Arbitration Clauses in Russia

A Landmark Decision on Validity and Enforcement of Arbitration Clauses in Russia

Earlier this week, the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court released the full text of its resolution in Bosch v. Avtosped (a case we covered earlier). Unsurprisingly, the court dismissed Bosch’s claims and referred them to arbitration. However, the Supreme Commercial Court used the case to go over some basic rules that the Russian courts […]