Archive for April, 2013

Review of Russian Commercial Cases Involving Foreign Persons

Review of Russian Commercial Cases Involving Foreign Persons

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 […]

Service of Foreign Proceedings on Russian Parties: Rules to be Clarified  by the Supreme Commercial Court

Service of Foreign Proceedings on Russian Parties: Rules to be Clarified by the Supreme Commercial Court

Later this year the Presidium of Russia’s Supreme Commercial Court will decide whether service by means other than those under the Hague Convention constitutes proper notice sufficient for enforcement of the resulting judgment of a foreign court. The decision will have significant repercussions for international litigations involving respondents based in Russia, since to date in many […]

Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Russia: Effect of Foreign Court Proceedings

Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Russia: Effect of Foreign Court Proceedings

In April, the Federal Arbitrazh Court for the Moscow Circuit faced two opportunities to address the implications of foreign set aside proceedings on the enforcement of an award in the Russian Federation. In the first case, it ruled that a party’s failure to raise an objection to the award in the set aside proceedings precluded […]

Moldova Gets a Mixed Result in the First ICSID Arbitration against it

Moldova Gets a Mixed Result in the First ICSID Arbitration against it

On 8 April 2013, the tribunal rendered an award in Arif v Moldova, the first ICSID arbitration against Moldova, which commenced several months after it had ratified the ICSID Convention. The tribunal (Cremades, Hanotiau, Knieper) rejected the majority of the investor’s claims, but found that Moldova had in one instance violated the obligation to provide fair […]

Franck Charles Arif v. Republic of Moldova

Franck Charles Arif v. Republic of Moldova

Mr Franck Charles Arif v Republic of Moldova, ICSID Arbitration (No. ARB:11:23), Award dated 8 April 2013

Posted in: Library
Challenging the Impartiality of Arbitrators in Russia: Reznik v ICAC

Challenging the Impartiality of Arbitrators in Russia: Reznik v ICAC

One of the most influential members of the Russian legal community – Henry Reznik, president of the Moscow Chamber of Advocates – recently vigorously criticised the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Russian Chamber of Commerce (the “ICAC”), a respected Russian arbitral institution. Mr Reznik expressed his surprise that the Presidium of ICAC, without giving […]

Survey of the Russian & CIS Arbitration Market: Focus on Legal Departments

Survey of the Russian & CIS Arbitration Market: Focus on Legal Departments

CIS Arbitration Forum, Legal Success magazine and Arbitrations.ru are pleased to commence the first study of the Russian & CIS  legal services market in International Arbitration. Depth, complexity and focus on Russia/CIS are the main distinctive features of the study.  It will consist of 3 parts: law firms’ survey, legal departments’ survey and arbitrators’ survey. In […]

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.online pharmacy […]