Rinat Gareev is a US-qualified attorney (admitted in New York), holds civil and common law degrees. In his current role of a Legal Consultant at a New York based law firm, Rinat represents domestic and international entities on a variety of general corporate matters and cross-border transactions, as well as assisting clients in navigating complex compliance issues.
Prior to returning to legal consulting, Rinat has gained experience by working and training in leading arbitral institutions in Malaysia, South Korea, Russia, international organizations (UNCITRAL) and law firms.
Through Rinat's professional and educational experience, he has developed expertise in trade law, aviation law, arbitration and cross-border dispute resolution. He has published several papers in international and local journals on issues relating to cross-border dispute resolution and also provides expert opinions on various domestic and international law-related issues. Rinat is HKIAC-accredited tribunal secretary.
Recent decades have witnessed an upsurge in the imposition of international sanctions in various regions of the world. Time and again, we hear sanctions impinge on the practice of international commercial arbitration and can significantly interfere with the smooth functioning of arbitral proceedings in various ways. Sanctions also pose unique challenges for award creditors seeking […]
On June 13, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved the long-lasting circuit split and sided with the courts holding that arbitral tribunals deciding private commercial disputes and at least certain ad hoc panels in investor-state treaty arbitrations do not qualify to obtain discovery in the United States, under the broad U.S. discovery rules, for use […]
In a case filed by Spetstehnika LLC (Russia) against Cadman Power Equipment Asset Corp. (Canada), the 20th Circuit Court of Appeals in Russia considered the enforceability of a potentially pathological arbitration clause that referred to a non-existent arbitral institution in Canada. The court of appeals, on 9 November 2021, refused to meddle with the parties’ […]
The US District Court for the District of Columbia has declined to enforce a $20 million arbitral award and granted Tajik Air’s motion to dismiss the award enforcement action on the jurisdictional grounds. The Court found it lacked personal jurisdiction over Tajik Air, the State-owned entity, pursuant to the Due Process Clause of the Fifth […]
It comes as no surprise that winning a case does not always imply that a party will automatically get paid, which is a recurring challenge in the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) context. On November 10, the Supreme Court of Ukraine dismissed a case filed by IKB-Invest seeking to hamper enforcement of an arbitral award in […]
In a landmark decision in Enka Insaat Ve Sanayi AS v OOO “Insurance Company Chubb” & Ors [2020] UKSC 38, the U.K. Supreme Court clarified the applicable principles for determining governing laws of an arbitration agreement in the absence of the parties’ express choice. The court upheld the appeal staying parallel court proceedings in Russia […]
On 23 September 2020, English High Court granted an application for an interim injunction to restrain liquidators for the International Bank of St. Petersburg from pursuing insolvency proceedings in Russia in breach of an LCIA arbitration agreement. Most jurisdictions provide several mechanisms to reverse transactions entered into by a debtor prior to the commencement of […]
By a decision handed down on 24 August 2020 in PAO Tatneft v Ukraine, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia rejected an application by Ukraine to set aside an award enforcement order. Tatneft, the fifth largest oil company in Russia, brought the action to enforce a UNCITRAL arbitral award entered against […]
The Svea Court of Appeal, on June 17th 2020, handed down its decision in the Republic of Kazakhstan v Stati et al annulling orders of attachment against assets of the National Bank of Kazakhstan. The court ruling is the latest development in the protracted process of enforcement of an SCC investor-state award granted against Kazakhstan […]
In Navigator Equities Ltd & Anor v Deripaska [2020] EWHC 1798 (Comm), the High Court of England and Wales, on 17th July 2020, held that the claimant’s contempt application was an abuse of process as being primarily motivated by personal animosity against the counterparty. In this large-value dispute emerging from Russia, the judge emphasized that […]
On 4 June 2020, the Commercial Court for the city of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region granted provisional relief in order to prevent dissipation of assets and thus to avoid the frustration of enforcement of an LCIA award in Russia. The court articulated ”reasonable suspicion“ standard for preliminary relief and provided further guidance and […]
On 8 June 2020, the Russian legislator has implemented changes to the Russian Commercial Procedure Code. The amendment grants Russian commercial courts exclusive jurisdiction over certain types of disputes whose subject matter relates to foreign sanctions or disputes involving sanctioned individuals and legal entities. At the request by sanctioned parties, Russian commercial courts now have […]
The dispute between Russia and the former majority shareholders of the now-defunct oil and gas company – Yukos has been ongoing since 2014 when the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) tribunal ruled against Russia for illegal expropriation of the company and awarded its former shareholders a record-breaking $50 billion. Since then award creditors continue their […]
The English Court of Appeal has recently confirmed in Enka v Chubb that English courts are competent to grant anti-suit injunctions in support of arbitrations seated in England and has provided further clarifications on how to properly determine the governing law of the arbitration agreement. A massive fire broke out in 2016 during the reconstruction […]
Connect
Connect with us on the following social media platforms.