Lex Mundi's Litigation, Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Practice Group is pleased to announce that a new Global Arbitration Guide is now available.
The past decade has seen a significant increase in the implementation and enforcement of anti-corruption legislation around the world. Whether your team is implementing a company-wide anti-corruption compliance code or advising management on a proposed overseas investment, it is imperative that legal functions within organizations understand how relevant anti-corruption laws apply to and inform the way in which they conduct their business.
The Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958 (New York) celebrates its 60th anniversary in 2018 (“Convention”). Since its inception, 159 Contracting States have joined the Convention. The USSR ratified the Convention on 22 November 1960. The Russian Federation, as a successor of the USSR, continues to be a Contracting State.
In recent years, the criticism of the existing form of examining investment disputes with states has increased significantly. Its source is not only states that are dissatisfied with the results of consideration and awarded multi-million compensations, but also arbitrators who directly resolve such disputes within the framework of international arbitration. The article presents an analysis of proposals for reforming the system of international investment arbitration, primarily the creation of a supranational investment court, both within the framework of the UNCITRAL activities, and within the framework of the European Commission’s initiatives.
The eighth issue of RAA40 Newsletter was released at the ABA’s 10th Annual Moscow Conference on the Resolution of International Business Disputes and RAA40 seminar ‘A pre-appointment interview of a potential arbitrator: how far is too far?’ on the eve of the Conference.
In article authors present their analysis of key changes in antitrust legislation which are proposed today in sphere of merger control regime and share with their own view on these changes, including with comparison with foreign antirust legislation.
Head of Employment Law Practice at EPAM Anna Ivanova provided some comments as part of Employment Record Retention Guidance Note for Russia.
The Supreme Court upheld the decisions below that the arbitration clause in a supply contract was not incapable of being performed because the claimant lacked the means for paying the SCC registration fee (its request of arbitration had been dismissed pursuant to the SCC Rules after its request for deferral of payment of the fee had been denied). In general, lack of means on the side of the claimant does not preclude arbitration.
Associate Maria Demina reviews whether competition law may assist policymakers in remedying patent law flaws.
Evgeny Raschevsky, Dmitry Dyakin, Dmitry Kaysin and Victor Radnaev became the authors of the Commercial Arbitration Russia chapter for the know-how section of GAR.
How prevalent is the use of arbitration in your jurisdiction? What are seen as the principal advantages and disadvantages of arbitration? Arbitration is the prevailing dispute resolution mechanism for disputes arising in connection with international commercial contracts, but has only limited application in domestic transactions. Reportedly less than one per cent of domestic disputes are resolved through arbitration.
The Supreme Court reversed the decisions of the lower courts, which had referred the parties to arbitration. The Court confirmed that an arbitration agreement may be concluded by reference to a separate document containing an arbitration clause. However, there was no valid agreement here: the arbitration provision in the RIPE NCC (Réseaux IP Européens Network Coordination Centre) Standard Service Agreement, which governs disputes between the RIPE and its members, did not apply to a dispute between members.
Senior Associate Alexey Karchiomov and Associate Yulia Beliakova have become the authors of Russian Overview for Getting the Deal Through: Shipping 2018.
The information exchange, as such, is not prohibited by the effective Russian Federal Law On Protection of Competition (the Competition Law or Law), but the content of the information exchange between business entities and its consequences are important. Generally, a confirmed exchange of any commercially important information (about prices, production volumes, etc) may be treated as showing that there is an anticompetitive arrangement between companies that will be qualified as a cartel, if the information is exchanged between competitors and if the exchange agreement has resulted in variation of prices, lowering the number of market players or gaining a competitive advantage (article 11 of the Competition Law).