KIAP Creates Precedent at the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation Which Will Impact Future of Arbitration Clause in the Russian Law

22.06.2012
On June 19, 2012 the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation heard the case concerning the right to equality in access to justice, ZAO RTK (MTS Retail) vs Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Rus. The matter drew attention of the legal community as the issue of equality in access to the judicial system has never been examined from this angle before.

Under the terms of the agreement between the Firm’s Client, ZAO RTK, and OOO Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Rus, the disputes arising from the agreement were to be resolved in accordance with the rules of one of international commercial arbitration tribunals, which yet allowed OOO Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Rus to seek in certain events resolution of a dispute through the state court of arbitration. ZAO RTK has not been granted such right.

The Client of the Firm went to the Arbitration Court for the City of Moscow having taken a position that such provision of the arbitration clause was unlawful as it created for the parties unequal opportunities in their access to the judicial system, with the question presented before the court of whether an arbitration clause that stipulates that in order to protect one’s violated right one participant in legal relationship shall seek assistance through commercial tribunals while the other one through the state court should be allowed.

The courts of three instances denied the claim, however the case was referred to the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation, in order to – as the presenting judge has explained – “establish in Russia the modern approaches to dispute resolution, similar to those that exist in certain European countries and the United States”.

The position of the Firm has been supported by the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation, which will certainly have serious impact on further body of precedent as well as contractual clause outlining the terms of arbitration agreement.

The client was represented by the partner of the Law Firm Ilya Ischuk and senior associate of Litigation practice Mikhail Samoylov.

Video of the court session and the speech of Mikhail Samoylov available here.


Twitter Facebook Яндекс Livejournal

Back to the list