Tag: jurisdiction

Baltic Arbitration Days-2017: issues discussed

Baltic Arbitration Days-2017: issues discussed

Riga hosted the 6th DIS Baltic Arbitration Days which discussed arbitration of disputes involving states or state-owned entities, corporate disputes and reflected on the lessons taught by annulment or  unenforceability of major arbitral awards in recent past. The conference was organised by BNT attorneys-at-law – one of leading international law firms in Central and Eastern […]

By 9 June, 2017 0 Comments Read More →
Российские суды подтвердили, что корпоративные споры были арбитрабельны и до принятия нового законодательства об арбитраже

Российские суды подтвердили, что корпоративные споры были арбитрабельны и до принятия нового законодательства об арбитраже

В настоящее время широко обсуждается реформа российского законодательства об арбитраже (третейском разбирательстве), в том числе, в контексте вопроса об арбитрабельности корпоративных споров. Теперь в ст. 225.1 Арбитражного процессуального кодекса Российской Федерации («АПК РФ») прямо закреплено, что такие споры могут быть переданы на рассмотрение третейского суда. Однако, как подтвердила новейшая судебная практика, такая возможность существовала и ранее. […]

Arbitrators and courts: two battlefields over the tribunal’s jurisdiction

Arbitrators and courts: two battlefields over the tribunal’s jurisdiction

In a recent decision rendered in Stockholm on 21 April 2016, the Swedish Supreme Court confirmed that national courts have the same authority to conduct a fully-fledged review of an arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction as the arbitral tribunal itself. The decision comes in relation to an ongoing UNCITRAL arbitration under the auspices of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, […]

By 1 August, 2016 0 Comments Read More →
Russia losing battles but winning wars with foreign investors: cases overview

Russia losing battles but winning wars with foreign investors: cases overview

More often than not, foreign investors reach some success in arbitration cases against Russia. However, obtaining ultimate remuneration for their efforts usually becomes a long and evasive target, because the award either gets annulled or faces insurmountable enforcement difficulties. Many international treaties of the Russian Federation including those concluded by the USSR as its legal predecessor include a “narrow” […]

Mr Pugachev’s Multi-Billion Dollar Claim and One Insurmountable Hurdle

Mr Pugachev’s Multi-Billion Dollar Claim and One Insurmountable Hurdle

High-net-worth individuals tend to acquire multiple passports not only as a matter of convenience (for travel or residence purposes) but also as a form of an insurance policy, in case relationships with high-ranking official(s) deteriorate past the point of no return.  For example, an acquired nationality has been used recently to bring compensation claims under a […]

By 17 November, 2015 0 Comments Read More →
New Rules on Jurisdictional Immunities of States in Russian Courts

New Rules on Jurisdictional Immunities of States in Russian Courts

The new law on Jurisdictional Immunities of Foreign States was signed by the Russian President on 3 November 2015. The law aims at discouraging foreign states from diminishing the immunity of Russian property abroad. The State Duma has drafted it in response to the arrests and freezing of Russian property in France, Belgium and Austria. After the […]

By 13 November, 2015 0 Comments Read More →
Stans Energy and Kutisay Mining v. Republic of Kyrgyzstan

Stans Energy and Kutisay Mining v. Republic of Kyrgyzstan

Kutisay & Stans Energy v Kyrgyz Republic, Moscow Arbitration, Award Annulment, Decision dated 27 July 2015  

Appellate Court Restores “Lender’s Option to Litigate” Clause

Appellate Court Restores “Lender’s Option to Litigate” Clause

On 12 March 2015 a Russian appellate court overruled the lower court’s decision invalidating the “lender’s option” part of a complex dispute resolution clause and referring parties to arbitration. As discussed earlier on the CIS Arbitration Forum, the lender’s option clause empowers only one of the parties to the facility agreement to institute proceedings before any competent state court in spite of the […]

By 15 April, 2015 0 Comments Read More →
Russian Courts Approach Framework Agreement’s Arbitration Clause

Russian Courts Approach Framework Agreement’s Arbitration Clause

Recent Russian commercial court judgments illustrate a new trend in the interpretation of framework supply agreements (“FSA”). The newly developed approach is supposed to become more sensitive to good faith, party willingness and intentions and factual and legal discourse. In Taganrog Automobile Plant v Hyundai Motor Company (case № 15AP-8173/2014) the courts implemented the Russian Supreme Commercial […]

Metal-Tech v Uzbekistan: No Jurisdiction Because of Corruption

Metal-Tech v Uzbekistan: No Jurisdiction Because of Corruption

The tribunal in the recently released award in Metal-Tech Ltd. v Republic of Uzbekistan (ICSID Case No. ARB/10/3) decided not to establish its jurisdiction over an investor claim because of corruption. The dispute erupted after the termination of a raw material supply contract and cancellation of an exclusive right to export of refined molybdenum oxide. Uzbekistan won a favourable […]

By 16 December, 2013 0 Comments Read More →
Turkmenistan: Two Recent Decisions on Jurisdiction Prove that the BIT Matters

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 […]

By 22 October, 2013 0 Comments Read More →
TransTeleCom Dispute: When is a Side a Not a Party?

TransTeleCom Dispute: When is a Side a Not a Party?

This article follows up on an earlier publication dealing with the Vega Engineering v TransTeleCom case. In that dispute, TransTeleCom raised various grounds to challenge the arbitral award, which were all considered by the Russian Arbitrazh Court.  One of the grounds – finality of the arbitral award – was discussed in the article mentioned above.  Another […]

ICSID Tribunal Refuses Jurisdiction in a Dispute Against Kazakhstan

ICSID Tribunal Refuses Jurisdiction in a Dispute Against Kazakhstan

According to the Kazakh Ministry of Justice, a foreign company which initiated a dispute against Kazakhstan has failed to establish that it was controlled by a national of a state party to the ICSID Convention. The ICSID tribunal in Caratube International Oil Company v Kazakhstan decided that the claim was brought by a Kazakh company which failed […]