On 7 June 2018, the Svea Court of Appeal in Sweden set aside the award by the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“SCC”) in favour of the Spanish investors (“Quasar de Valores SICAV and others v. Russia”). Seven Spanish companies (the “Claimants”) originally filed the SCC claims against Russia in 2007, seeking […]
Eastern European Dispute Resolution Forum held on 22 September 2017 in Minsk featured guests and speakers from law firms and various arbitral institutions. The panel of speakers from civil and common law jurisdictions presented their reports on the most challenging aspects of the arbitration proceedings, such as cross-examination, the role of arbitral institutions in conducting the […]
On 2 October 2017, a Texas federal judge confirmed a $140+ million award issued by a tribunal under the Rules of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce in favour of Carpatsky Petroleum Corporation (“CPC“) against the Ukrainian oil company, OJSC Ukrnafta. The Texas ruling marks the important end of an award battle […]
On January 2009, Gazprom and Naftogaz signed a confidential long-term gas sales agreement (the “Contract“) for 2009-2019. Some in the media declared that the Contract included an oil-linked formula for the gas price, a “take-or-pay” clause and a price review clause. Five years later, Gazprom finds itself claiming USD 4.5 billion in unpaid debts for natural […]
Осенью в Минске уже во второй раз пройдет Форум по разрешению споров в странах Восточной Европы (EEDRF). Международный формат мероприятия на несколько дней объединит юристов со всего мира под одним слоганом «Докажи это, если сможешь!» для обсуждения ключевых тем, касающихся рассмотрения споров в международном коммерческом арбитраже и государственных судах. See English text below 22 сентября […]
On 9 December 2016 the Svea Court of Appeal (Sweden) rejected Kazakhstan’s request for the award in Anatolie Stati, Gabriel Stati, Ascom Group SA and Terra Raf Trans Trading Ltd v Kazakhstan (Arbitral Award in SCC Case No. V (116/2010) the “Award“) to be set aside, finding Kazakhstan’s allegations regarding a presentation by investors during the […]
An investor filed the emergency arbitration proceeding against Moldova.online pharmacy https://www.phamatech.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/new/prednisone.html no prescription drugstore The claims arose out of the suspension of claimant’s voting rights in a Moldovan bank and the forced sale of its shares within three months allegedly ordered by Moldova’s National Bank.online pharmacy https://www.phamatech.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/new/lexapro.html no prescription drugstore The emergency arbitrator stayed Moldova’s attempts […]
Energorynok, a state-owned energy company, brought an arbitration claim against the Republic of Moldova seeking to recover a debt of USD 1.7 million from an economic agent affiliated to Moldova’s Energy Ministry. The Tribunal found confusing and inconsistent the Claimant’s arguments on quantum and rejected the claim as groundless. The award was rendered on 29 January 2015 and is available […]
Two recent Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“SCC“) emergency arbitration awards in investment arbitrations against the Republic of Moldova, with different conclusions based on a similar factual and legal background, inject uncertainty regarding the interpretation of conditions for granting interim relief in investment arbitration, while reaffirming positions on certain long-debated issues. Practical implications The messages to […]
Applications for interim relief have become a frequently used procedural tool among foreign investors arbitrating against CIS states. Emergency arbitration proceedings under the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC) Arbitration Rules are particularly in demand: at least four applications for interim reliefs against CIS states have been filed since 2014 (TSIKInvest v Republic of Moldova; JKX Oil & […]
The Gibraltar registered company Remington Worldwide Limited (“Remington”) filed a request for arbitration with the SCC on 22 September 2008. According to information communicated by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, the company accused Ukraine of violating several provisions of Article 10 of the ECT, and, in particular, of failure to provide effective means for the assertion of claims and enforcement of […]
CIS Arbitration Forum is starting a series of interviews with representatives of major international arbitration institutions working on disputes related to Russia and the CIS region. We hope the readers will appreciate updates from major arbitration institutions and their efforts to improve services rendered to arbitration users from the region. The series starts with an […]
2014 was one of the most difficult years in the contemporary history of Ukraine in both political and economic terms. The country lived through the Revolution of Dignity in February, the annexation of Crimea in March, the ongoing military conflict in eastern Ukraine and deep financial and economic crisis. In order to counter these difficulties and to […]
Yuri Bogdanov and Yulia Bogdanova v. Republic of Moldova, SCC Case No. V091/2012 – Final Award – 16 April 2013 (became available in 2014 only) – Part 1 Yuri Bogdanov and Yulia Bogdanova v. Republic of Moldova, SCC Case No. V091/2012 – Final Award – 16 April 2013 (became available in 2014 only) – Part […]
In January 2015 the Russian Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts which refused to enforce a SCC arbitration award due to public policy reasons. Prior to that the Swedish Svea Court of Appeal has reviewed the same case in the annulment proceedings and came to the opposite conclusion. The approaches of the Russian and […]
On 29 January 2015 Gazprom released a report on its activities and financial indicators for the nine months up to the end of last September. In this report Gazprom described the procedural details of the forthcoming “gas price” arbitration between Gazprom and Ukrainian Naftogaz, launched by the parties in summer 2014. This is not the first time […]
A significant number of foreign assets can be found in the territory of the Russian Federation. As such, the country may become a popular venue for the enforcement of arbitral awards against foreign entities. This post looks at Russian law and practice when it comes to enforcement of arbitral awards against parties that are not incorporated in […]
In a case currently pending before the commercial courts of the North-Western Circuit, the Russian courts will get an opportunity to confirm that disputes arising out of share purchase agreements are arbitrable. Over the past few years several courts have ruled that they are not. With arbitration remaining the preferred means for Russian M&A disputes’ […]
Validity of choice-of-court agreements, possibility of piercing the corporate veil and falling under jurisdiction of Russian court have always been important concerns for international companies doing business in Russia or with Russian legal entities. The Russian Supreme Commercial (Arbitrazh) Court (“SCC”) will soon clarify these issues in an Informational letter with a Review of Certain […]
Yara International ASA v JSC Acron, SCC Arbitration No. V (135:2006), Award dated 17 June 2008
TNK Trade Ltd. v Swonco Swedish Oil AB, SCC Arbitration (No. 078:2000), Award dated 19 March 2004
Boeing companies v Open Joint-Stock Company S.P. Korolev Rocket and others, UNCITRAL Arbitration, 11 October 2010
Rual Trade Ltd. v Viva Trade LLC and others, SCC Arbitration (No. F 192:2009), Award dated 21 April 2010
Rosukrenergo AG v Emfesz, SCC Arbitration No. V (183:2009), 17 March 2011
AMTO LLC v Ukraine, SCC Arbitration (No. 08:2005), Award dated 26 March 2008
Petrobart Ltd. v the Kyrgyz Republic, SCC Arbitration (No. 126:2003) Award dated 29 March 2005 Petrobart Ltd. v Kyrgyz Republic, UNCITRAL Arbitration, Award dated 13 February 2003
Mincom Service Pty Ltd. v TOO Aktubinskaya Mednaya Companiya, SCC Arbitration (No. 102:2010), Award dated 20 September 2010
JSC Techsnabexport v Palmco Corporation, SCC Arbitration (No. 010/2006), Award dated 11 June 2007 JSC Techsnabexport v Palmco Corporation, Final Partial Award dated 22 June 2007
Gazprom v Republic of Lithuania, SCC Arbitration No. V (125:2011), Award dated 31 July 2012
Globe Nuclear Services, Supply GNSS, Ltd. v AO Techsnabexport, SCC Arbitration (No. 156:2003), Award dated 11 June 2007
In the past decade Ukraine has been one of the busiest respondents in the CIS region. However, the arbitration statistics of 2012 shows a change in this trend. On 30 January 2013 the Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources of Ukraine confirmed that the settlement agreement between Vanco Prykerchenska Ltd and Ukraine had been approved by the Stockholm […]
The Presidium of the Russian Supreme Commercial Court has clarified its position on the authority to conclude arbitration agreements. The general counsel of a company branch concluded a contract with an arbitration agreement under a power of attorney authorising him to represent the company at court and in particular to settle disputes or to refer […]
A settlement agreement can be concluded even after the arbitral tribunal has rendered an award in the case, and such an agreement can be approved by the same arbitral tribunal as a consent award. The Russian Supreme Commercial Court (the “SCC”) Presidium reached this conclusion on June 7, 2012. The circumstances of the case were as […]
Remington Worldwide Limited v Ukraine is interesting not only as the first arbitration under the Energy Charter Treaty (the “ECT”) conducted in Russian. It also reasserts the importance of a fundamental aspect of the rule of law – the principle of legal certainty. The case demonstrates how far-reaching the effects of the application of the exceptions from […]
An arbitral tribunal in Stockholm concluded in an award released yesterday that tax assessment measures taken against Yukos were arbitrary and discriminatory. The proceedings were instituted by a group of Spanish investors in 2007. The award also confirmed that the claimant’s expenses in the arbitration were entirely funded by the Menatep Group (Yukos’ majority shareholder) which […]
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 […]
In 2011, within the period of two months, the Supreme Commercial (Arbitrazh) Court of the Russian Federation rendered two important decisions concerning the enforcement of international arbitral awards. In both cases enforcement applications were challenged on the ground, inter alia, of excessive damages as contrary to the public policy of the Russian Federation. Pursuant to paragraph […]
A recent case handed down by the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation (the “SCC”) marks a further step by it towards the favouring of arbitration in Russia. The SCC confirmed that notifying a branch of the opposing party in arbitral proceedings is sufficient for the purposes of satisfying the due notice requirement. Also, […]
It seems that in at least one respect Russian courts are now more arbitration-friendly than courts in many other countries. In a string of cases decided during 2011 the Supreme Commercial Court held that enforcement of an arbitral award may not be refused on the basis of a tribunal’s lack of jurisdiction if the award was […]
Russian courts are frequently criticized for being arbitration-unfriendly. Practitioners however acknowledge that most awards are recognized and enforced. In fact, the Russian courts are increasingly adopting pro-arbitration stance, which in some instances goes further than that adopted by the jurisdiction traditionally considered arbitration-friendly. In three recent cases Russian courts took the view, that the respondent […]
Connect
Connect with us on the following social media platforms.